scholarly journals Clinical efficacy of novel self-adhesive flowable composite resin restoration: in vivo study

2017 ◽  
pp. 060-065
Author(s):  
Elbaz Ghada A
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Efficacy ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Composite Resin Restoration

scholarly journals CLINICAL EVALUATION OF THE NANO HYBRID BULK FILL COMPOSITE AND NANO HYBRID FLOWABLE COMPOSITE IN CLASS I RESTORATIONS--- AN IN VIVO STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anil K. Tomer ◽  
Hysum Mushtaq ◽  
Anila Krishna Saxena ◽  
Megna Bhatt ◽  
Ayush Tyagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Recall Rate ◽  
Class I ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Flowable Composite

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a nano filled flowable and nano hybrid bulk fill resin composite in class I restorations. Methods and Materials: Twenty patients were selected for this in vivo study. Each patient received at least one pair of restorations, restored with nano hybrid bulk fill resin composite (IPS Empress direct [IED]) and nano hybrid Tetric N Ceram flowable composite [TNC]. Each restorative resin system was used with its respective adhesive system according to manufacturers’ instructions. A total of 40 class I restorations were placed by one operator.  Restorations were blindly evaluated by two examiners at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months respectively using modified US Public Health Service Ryge criteria. The data obtained was statistically analyzed using Chi square test to compare the two restorative materials for each category. Results: At 3, 6 and 12, months, recall rate was 100%, 95% and 85%, respectively, with a retention rate of 100%. There were statistically significant differences between the two restorative resins in terms of marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration (p<0.05). No differences were observed between the restorative resins in terms of retention (p<0.05). None of the restorations showed postoperative sensitivity, or loss of anatomic form. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, nano hybrid bulk fill composite resin viz. IPS EMPRESS DIRECT showed better clinical performance than nano filled flowable composite in terms of marginal discoloration and marginal adaptation. Keywords: direct composite, bulk, hybrid filled resin

Microleakage of Ormocer-based Restorative Material in Primary Teeth: An In Vivo Study

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-17
Author(s):  
Saad AL-Harbi ◽  
Najat Farsi
Keyword(s):  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Preventive Measures ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Cavity Wall ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Dye Penetration

This in vivo study aimed to compare, by means of dye penetration, the microleakage values of an Ormocerbased material (Admira) and a commonly-used composite resin (Restorative Z-100) and to assess the differences in the degree of microleakage according to the cavity wall location for both tested materials. No statistically significant differences were found in the degree of microleakage between the 2 materials or the location of cavity walls. Additional preventive measures should be considered to minimize leakage since none of the restorative systems used, eliminated microleakage.

scholarly journals Incidence of tooth sensitivity after resin composite class III restoration with flowable composite as liner

2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andini Dimyati ◽  
Endang Sukartini ◽  
Dudi Aripin
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Sensitivity Test ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Class Iii ◽  
Descriptive Research ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Flow Capacity ◽  
Composite Resin Restoration

Resin composites is one of the currently most frequently used aesthetic restoration material. A drawback of resin composites is contraction of polimerization which may result in the coming about of dental sensitivity due to microleakage. Flowable composite has high flow capacity and better adaptation capability making the thinnest application on cavity surfaces. An advantage of flowable composite is the possibility of using it as liner in composite resin restoration, which is expected to minimize the occurrence of post restoration dental sensitivity. This research was a descriptive research using the purposive sampling technique. The sample consisted of 27 first incisive and/or second incisive permanent maxilla teeth. A sensitivity test was used on the sample using chlor ethyl and completing questionnaire by patients. The result of dental sensitivity test indicated that 88.9% of the patients did not experience post restoration dental sensitivity and 11.1% of the patients was experience a decrease of dental sensitivity level. Based on research results the conclusion could be drawn that the used of flowable composite as a liner in resin composite class III restoration didn't had a post restoration dental sensitivity.

Posterior composite restorations in primary molars: an in vivo comparison of three restorative techniques

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flávia Pilatti Rastelli ◽  
Ricardo de Sousa Vieira ◽  
Márcio Souza Rastelli
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
In Vivo Study ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Insertion Technique ◽  
Bulk Insertion

This in vivo study evaluated the clinical performance of class II restorations, in primary molars after 12 months. Three restorative techniques were used: filling the cavities in bulk; filling with three horizontal increments and placement in three horizontal increments using pre-polymerized composite inserts. The composite resin used was Prisma TP.H (Caulk-Dentsply) with the adhesive system ScotchbondMultipurpose (3M). Initially 90 class II restorations were placed in 27 patients from 8 to 10 years of age and followed-up for 12 months. After this period 55 restorations were evaluated for anatomic form, color alterations at the margins, presence of decay and marginal adaptation. The results showed that all groups presented similar rates of wear, the bulk insertion technique showed better results for marginal adaptation, color alterations of the margins and less presence of caries at occlusal margins, and that composite resin TP.H could be used in class II restorations in primary molars.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document