Effect of 940 nm laser diode irradiation prior to bonding procedure on postoperative sensitivity following class II composite restorations: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the performance and postoperative sensitivity of a posterior resin composite with that of bonded amalgam in 40 (n = 20) large sized cavities and to evaluate whether resin composite could be an alternative for bonded amalgam. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial. Twenty patients in need of at least two posterior restorations were recruited. Authors randomly assigned one half of the restorations to receive bonded amalgam and the other half to composite restorations. Forty bonded amalgams (n = 20) and composites (n = 20) were evaluated for their performance on modified-US Public Health Service criteria and postoperative sensitivity using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 36-months. Results: Success rate of this study was 100%. First clinical alterations were rated as Bravo after 1 year in marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, and surface roughness for both amalgam and composite. At the 3rd year, overall “Bravo” rated restorations were 12 for bonded amalgam and 13 for resin composites. There were no significant differences among the VAS scores of composites and bonded amalgams for all periods (P > 0.05) except for the comparisons at the 3rd year evaluation (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, both resin composite and bonded amalgam were clinically acceptable. Postoperative sensitivity results tend to decrease more in composite restorations rather than amalgams. Therefore, it was concluded that posterior resin composite can be used even in large sized cavities.

Download Full-text

A randomized clinical trial of class II composite restorations using direct and semidirect techniques

Clinical Oral Investigations ◽

10.1007/s00784-019-02999-6 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 24 (2) ◽

pp. 1053-1063

Author(s):

Carlos Rocha Gomes Torres ◽

Mariane Cintra Mailart ◽

Érica Crastechini ◽

Fernanda Alves Feitosa ◽

Stella Renato Machado Esteves ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Class Ii ◽

Composite Restorations

Download Full-text

Comparison of Proximal Contact and Contours of Premolars restored with Composite Restoration using Circumferential Matrix Band with and without Separation Ring: A Randomized Clinical Trial

International Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry ◽

10.5005/jp-journals-10019-1068 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 7-13

Author(s):

Farhan Raza Khan ◽

Fahad Umer ◽

Munawar Rahman

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Intervention Group ◽

Rank Correlation ◽

Class Ii ◽

Control Group ◽

P Value ◽

Composite Restorations ◽

Matrix Band ◽

Composite Restoration

ABSTRACT Aim To compare the proximal contacts and contours in class II composite restorations in premolars achieved with Automatrix band with separation ring vs Automatrix band alone. Materials and methods A total of 188 premolar teeth with proximal cavity were assigned on alternate basis in two groups. Intervention group teeth received Automatrix band with separation ring using clamp forceps, while the control group received Automatrix band alone. All preparations were restored with P-60 composite (3M-ESPE Dental, USA). The outcome (proximal tightness) was determined by a blinded assessor. Chi-square test was applied to compare the contact tightness between the two groups. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was applied to determine any correlation between the contact tightness with proximal contours. p-value of 0.05 was taken as significant. Results The intervention group exhibited better proximal contacts than the control group (p-value 0.040). There was no correlation between the contact tightness and the proximal contours. Conclusion The use of separation ring along with Automatrix matrix band in class II composite restorations resulted in significantly better proximal contacts than Automatrix band alone. However, the separation ring does not contribute in producing an additional improvement in the proximal contours. The proximal contour has no relationship with the proximal contact tightness. Clinical significance Several techniques have been advocated to get tight contacts in composites including interdental separation ring. Our study focuses on using separation ring with circumferential matrix band instead of a sectional band. Moreover, we have attempted to study proximal tightness and proximal contours of composite restoration as separate variables. How to cite this article Khan FR, Umer F, Rahman M. Comparison of Proximal Contact and Contours of Premolars restored with Composite Restoration using Circumferential Matrix Band with and without Separation Ring: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2013;3(1):7-13.

Download Full-text

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Enamel Matrix Derivative and Membrane Treatment of Buccal Class II Furcation Involvement in Mandibular Molars. Part I: Study Design and Results for Primary Outcomes

Journal of Periodontology ◽

10.1902/jop.2004.75.8.1150 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 75 (8) ◽

pp. 1150-1160 ◽

Cited By ~ 71

Author(s):

Søren Jepsen ◽

Bernd Heinz ◽

Karin Jepsen ◽

Mehrdad Arjomand ◽

Thomas Hoffmann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Study Design ◽

Class Ii ◽

Enamel Matrix Derivative ◽

Enamel Matrix ◽

Mandibular Molars ◽

Furcation Involvement ◽

Membrane Treatment ◽

Matrix Derivative

Download Full-text

Randomized clinical trial of class II restoration in permanent teeth comparing ART with composite resin after 12 months

Clinical Oral Investigations ◽

10.1007/s00784-018-2787-1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 23 (9) ◽

pp. 3623-3635 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Rafael Menezes-Silva ◽

S. R. M. Velasco ◽

R. S. Bastos ◽

G. Molina ◽

H. M. Honório ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Class Ii ◽

Permanent Teeth

Download Full-text

Frankel 2 appliance versus the Modified Twin Block appliance for Phase 1 treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion in children and adolescents: A randomized clinical trial

The Angle Orthodontist ◽

10.2319/042419-290.1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 90 (2) ◽

pp. 202-208 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ciara Campbell ◽

Declan Millett ◽

Niamh Kelly ◽

Marie Cooke ◽

Michael Cronin

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Children And Adolescents ◽

Randomized Clinical Trial ◽

Treatment Duration ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Class Ii ◽

Parent Perspectives ◽

Twin Block ◽

Division 1 ◽

Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare Phase 1 treatment, using the Frankel 2 (FR2) or the modified Twin Block (MTB), for Class II division 1 malocclusion in children and adolescents with respect to: treatment duration, number of appliance breakages, occlusal outcome, and patient and parent perspectives. Materials and Methods: Sixty participants with a Class II division 1 malocclusion were randomly assigned to either the FR2 or MTB appliance in a two-armed parallel randomized clinical trial with an allocation ratio of 1 to 1. Time to achieve a Class I incisor relationship was the primary outcome. The number of appliance breakages was recorded. The Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index was used to evaluate pre- and post-treatment occlusal outcome on study models. Participants completed the child OHRQoL (oral health-related quality of life), Piers-Harris, Standard Continuum of Aesthetic Need (SCAN), and Oral Aesthetic Subjective Impact Score (OASIS) questionnaires pre- and post-treatment; parents completed a SCAN questionnaire. Results: Forty-two participants completed treatment (FR2: 20; MTB: 22). Multiple imputation was used to impute missing data for noncompleters. Mean treatment duration was similar for the two appliances (FR2: 376 days [SD 101]; MTB: 340 days [SD 102]; P = .41). There were no significant differences in mean number of appliance breakages (FR2: 0.3 SD 0.7; MTB: 0.4 SD 0.8; P = .67 or mean PAR score P = .48). Patient and parent perspectives did not differ between appliances (P > .05). Conclusions: Phase 1 treatment duration, number of appliance breakages, occlusal outcome, and patient and parent perspectives were similar in 11–14 year olds with Class II division 1 malocclusion treated using the FR2 or MTB appliance.

Download Full-text