scholarly journals A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 016-022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hande Kemaloglu ◽  
Tijen Pamir ◽  
Huseyin Tezel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Public Health Service ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

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.

Postoperative sensitivity in posterior resin composite restorations with prior application of a glutaraldehyde-based desensitizing solution: a randomized clinical trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 103918
Author(s):  
Isabelle Lins Macêdo de Oliveira ◽  
Taíse Alessandra Hanzen ◽  
Alexandra Mara de Paula ◽  
Jorge Perdigão ◽  
Marcos Antonio Japiassú Resende Montes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Prior Application ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Clinical Evaluation of Noncarious Cervical Lesions of Different Extensions Restored With Bulk-fill or Conventional Resin Composite: Preliminary Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. E11-E20
Author(s):  
AMO Correia ◽  
ALB Jurema ◽  
MR Andrade ◽  
ALS Borges ◽  
E Bresciani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Intergroup Comparison ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY Purpose: This randomized clinical trial evaluated the influence of the occlusogingival distance (OGD) of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) on the clinical performance of a regular bulk-fill resin composite and a regular nanofilled resin composite. Methods and Materials: A total of 140 restorations were randomly placed in 77 participants by one operator. NCCLs were divided into four groups (n=35) according to OGD (1.5 mm±10% or 3 mm±10%) and resin composites (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior [B] or Filtek Z350 XT [C]) used: 1.5 mm-B, 1.5 mm-C, 3 mm-B, and 3 mm-C. A two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond) was applied following manufacturer instructions in all restorative procedures. Restorations were polished 1 week after placement. Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline (7 days), 6 months, and 1 year by two calibrated examiners, according to the modified US Public Health Service criteria evaluating fractures/retention, marginal staining, marginal adaptation, recurrence of caries, anatomic form, postoperative sensitivity, and surface texture. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for intergroup comparison in each follow-up; the Friedman analysis of variance, followed by the least significant difference test (multiple comparisons) was used for intragroup comparison between baseline and follow-up times (α=0.05). Results: Two restorations were lost at 12 months (1 for 1.5 mm-B and 1 for 3 mm-B). The retention rates at 12 months were 100% for 1.5 mm-C, 97% for 1.5 mm-B, 100% for 3 mm-C; and 97% for 3 mm-B, with no statistical difference among the groups (p=0.570). At 12 months, a statistically significant difference was found among the follow-up times for the same group (1.5 mm-B, 1.5 mm-C, and 3 mm-B) regarding the marginal staining criterion; moreover, the 3 mm-C group showed a significant difference from 6 months. No significant difference was found for the other parameters. Conclusion: Both resin composites showed acceptable clinical performance, and the OGD of NCCLs did not influence the clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 12 months.

Effect of Glass-ionomer Cement Lining on Postoperative Sensitivity in Occlusal Cavities Restored with Resin Composite—A Randomized Clinical Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 648-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. F. Burrow ◽  
D. Banomyong ◽  
C. Harnirattisai ◽  
H. H. Messer
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Glass Ionomer Cement ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Use Of Self ◽  
Total Etching ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity ◽  
Ionomer Cement

Clinical Relevance Glass-ionomer lining showed no benefit in reducing postoperative sensitivity associated with occlusal resin composite restorations. The use of self-etching adhesive demonstrated postoperative sensitivity similar to that of total-etching adhesive.

Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial of Class II Restorations Using Low-shrinkage Flowable Resin Composite

2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
SMB Frascino ◽  
TC Fagundes ◽  
UAE Silva ◽  
V Rahal ◽  
ACS Barboza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Cold Sensitivity ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Different Types ◽  
One Year ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity ◽  
Equality Test

SUMMARYPurpose:The aim of this prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial was to evaluate postoperative sensitivity, clinical performance, and interproximal contacts after using different restorative systems.Methods and Materials:Fifty-three subjects each received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional resin composite (PA: Peak Universal+Amelogen Plus, Ultradent), low-shrinkage flowable and nanoparticulate resin composites (ABF: Adper Single Bond 2+Filtek Bulk Fill Flow+Filtek Z350XT, 3M ESPE), and low-shrinkage flowable and microhybrid resin composites (XST: XP Bond+SDR+TPH3, Dentsply). Postoperative sensitivity was assessed at 24 hours, seven days, 90 days, and six months. The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated at baseline, six months, and one year. Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to evaluate postoperative sensitivity and interproximal contacts. The equality test of two proportions and logistic regression analysis were used to assess the clinical performance.Results:No statistically significant differences were observed among groups for postoperative sensitivity. The highest spontaneous sensitivity was reported at 24 hours. ABF was the only group that did not present a reduction in cold sensitivity. Color, marginal discoloration, and superficial staining showed differences among the groups. XST did not show superficial staining after one year. No differences were observed among groups in relation to interproximal contacts. XST resulted in the loss of interproximal contact after one year.Conclusions:Different types of restorative systems do not influence postoperative sensitivity; however, ABF maintained cold sensitivity over time. Marginal discoloration occurred for all groups but occurred earliest for PA. XST presented a reduction of interproximal contact after one year of evaluation.

Postoperative sensitivity associated with resin composite restorations

ORL ro ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (41) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Irina-Maria Gheorghiu ◽  
Loredana Mitran ◽  
Mihai Mitran ◽  
Anca-Nicoleta Temelcea ◽  
Sânziana Scărlătescu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document