scholarly journals Direct Resin Composite Restorations versus Indirect Composite Inlays: One-Year Results

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 25-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliano Sartori Mendonça ◽  
José Roberto Pereira Lauris ◽  
Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro ◽  
Ranulfo Gianordoli Neto ◽  
Sérgio Lima Santiago ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Texture ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Color Match ◽  
Secondary Caries ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Indirect Composite ◽  
One Year ◽  
Composite Inlays

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of direct resin composite restorations (Tetric Ceram-TC) and indirect composite inlays (Targis-TG) after 12 months. Methods and Materials Seventy-six Class I and II restorations (44 direct and 32 indirect) were inserted in premolars and molars with carious lesions or deficient restorations in 30 healthy patients according to the manufacturer's instructions. Each restoration was evaluated at baseline and after 12 months according to the modified USPHS criteria for color match (CM), marginal discoloration (MD), secondary caries (SC), anatomic form (AF), surface texture (ST), marginal integrity (MI), and pulp sensitivity (PS). Data were analyzed by Fisher and McNemar Chisquare tests. Results No secondary caries and no pulpal sensitivity were observed after 12 months. However, significant changes in marginal discoloration (MD) criteria could be detected between baseline and one-year results for both materials (p<0.05). For marginal integrity (MI) criteria, the differences between baseline and oneyear recall were statistically significant (p<0.05). For marginal integrity (MI) criteria, Tetric Ceram (TC) showed results statistically superior to Targis (TG) in both observation periods (p<0.05). No statistically significant changes in color match (CM), anatomic form (AF), or surface texture (ST) appeared during the observation periods (p>0.05). Conclusions Direct resin composite restorations performed better than indirect composite inlays for marginal integrity, but all restorations were judged to be clinically acceptable. Clinical Significance Tetric Ceram direct restorations and Targis indirect inlays in posterior teeth provide satisfactory clinical performance and the comparison between them showed little difference after one year. Citation Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JRP, Navarro MFL, Carvalho RM. Direct Resin Composite Restorations versus Indirect Composite Inlays: One-Year Results. J Contemp Dent Pract [Internet]. 2010 May; 11(3):025-032. Available from: http://www.thejcdp.com/journal/ view/volume11-issue3-santiago.

One Year Clinical Evaluation of Two Different Types of Composite Resins in Posterior Teeth

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 26-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ranuifo Gianordoli Neto ◽  
Sérgio Lima Santiago ◽  
Juliano Sartori Mendonça ◽  
Vanara Florëncio Passos ◽  
José Roberto Pereira Lauris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Surface Texture ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Different Types ◽  
One Year ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of two adhesive restorative systems (Single Bond/Filtek P-60 and Single Bond/Filtek Z-250) in posterior teeth using a modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) system. Methods and Materials A total of 70 restorations were placed in molars and premolars in 30 patients (14 females and 16 males; 18-40 years) by one operator. All restorations were directly evaluated by two examiners at baseline, six months, and 12 months using the following modified USPHS rating criteria: marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, surface texture, contour, postoperative sensitivity, and recurrent caries. Results At six and 12 months all restorations were available for evaluation of marginal discoloration, surface texture, contour, postoperative sensitivity, and recurrent caries that remained with 100% Alpha-ratings at recalls for both restorative systems. Marginal integrity for P-60 was scored as 94.3% and 91.4% Alpha at six and 12 months, respectively, and rates for Z-250 were 100% and 97.1% Alpha at six and 12 months, respectively. Statistical analysis was completed with Fisher's exact and McNemar Chi-square tests at a significance level of 5% (P<0.05). Conclusion All restorations were clinically satisfactory and no significant differences were found among them. Clinical Significance Posterior resin composite restorations placed under appropriate conditions provide a satisfactory clinical performance. Citation Gianordoli Neto R, Santiago SL, Mendonça JS, Passos VF, Lauris RP, Navarro MFdeL. One Year Clinical Evaluation of Two Different Types of Composite Resins in Posterior Teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 May; (9)4:026-033.

Anterior Z250 resin composite restorations: one-year evaluation of clinical performance

2003 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 241-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. O. N�rhi ◽  
J. Tanner ◽  
I. Ostela ◽  
K. Narva ◽  
T. Nohrstr�m ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
One Year

scholarly journals Seven-Year Clinical Performance of Resin Composite Versus Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorations in Noncarious Cervical Lesions

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 578-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
TC Fagundes ◽  
TJE Barata ◽  
E Bresciani ◽  
SL Santiago ◽  
EB Franco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Glass Ionomer ◽  
Retention Performance ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Resin Modified Glass Ionomer

SUMMARY Purpose The purpose of this study was to comparatively assess the seven-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch-and-rinse adhesive with resin composite (RC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) restorations in noncarious cervical lesions. Methods and Materials One operator placed 70 restorations (35 restorations in each group) in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation. The restorations were directly assessed by two independent examiners, using modified US Public Health Service criteria at baseline and 6, 12, 24, 60, and 84 months. The obtained data were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the Fisher and McNemar tests. A difference was significant if p&lt;0.05. Results Twenty patients were available for recall after seven years (66.6%), and 25 RC and 26 RMGI restorations out of 70 restorations were evaluated. Excellent agreement was registered for all criteria between examiners (κ≥0.85). Alfa and bravo scores were classified as clinically acceptable. The McNemar test detected significant differences within RC restorations between baseline and seven-year evaluations for anatomic form, marginal integrity, and retention (p&lt;0.05). For RMGI restorations, a significant difference was identified for marginal integrity (p&lt;0.05). As to material comparison, the Fisher exact showed a better retention performance for RMGI restorations than for RC restorations (p&lt;0.05). Twelve composite restorations were dislodged (52.0% retention) and three ionomer restorations were lost (88.5% retention). The cumulative success rate for RC and RMGI was 30% and 58.1%, respectively. Conclusions After seven years of service, the clinical performance of RMGI restorations was superior to that of the adhesive system/resin composite restorations in this study.

scholarly journals Clinical evaluation of two types of ceramic inlays and onlays after 6 months

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Jacinta M. Coelho Santos ◽  
Carlos Eduardo Francischone ◽  
Gildo Coelho Santos Júnior ◽  
Eduardo Bresciani ◽  
José Carlos Romanini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Surface Texture ◽  
Glass Ceramic ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Resin Cement ◽  
Color Match ◽  
Rubber Dam ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of two types of ceramics: a slurry-powder ceramic (Duceram Plus, Degussa) - D and a hot-pressed leucite-based glass-ceramic (IPS Empress, Ivoclar Vivadent) - IPS. Eighty-six restorations, 44 IPS and 42 D, were made by one operator. A total of 33 onlays and 53 inlays on twenty-seven premolars and 59 molars were cemented in 35 patients of both sexes, mean age 35 years. All restorations were cemented with the dual-resin cement (Variolink, Ivoclar-Vivadent) under rubber dam and were evaluated at the baseline and after six months, using the modified U.S.P.H.S. criteria for postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, fracture, color match, marginal discoloration, marginal integrity and surface texture. Additionally radiographs and intraoral photographs were carried out. At baseline 86 restorations were analyzed and all of them received Alfa rating, except for the following that received Bravo rating for postoperative sensitivity - IPS (2.27%); D (7.14%); for color match - IPS (2.27%); D (2.38%) and for surface texture - IPS (2.27%); D (11.90%). After 6 months 100% of the restorations were analyzed and the following received Bravo rating: color match - IPS (4.55%) and D (9.52%); surface texture - IPS (2.27%) and D (11.9%); marginal discoloration - IPS (6.82%) and D (4.76%) and marginal integrity - IPS (4.55%) and D (7.14%). The results were submitted to the Fisher and McNemar Statistical Tests. No significant differences were noticed between the two ceramics. Both ceramics demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance after six months.

scholarly journals One-year clinical performance of lithium disilicate versus resin composite CAD/CAM onlays

Odontology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 259-270
Author(s):  
Joana Souza ◽  
Mª Victoria Fuentes ◽  
Eugenia Baena ◽  
Laura Ceballos
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Oral Care ◽  
Lithium Disilicate ◽  
Biological Properties ◽  
Color Match ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Cad Cam ◽  
One Year

AbstractTo compare the 1-year clinical performance of lithium disilicate and resin composite CAD/CAM onlay restorations. Twenty patients that required two restorations in posterior teeth, with at least one cusp to be covered, received two onlays. One was made with IPS e.max CAD (Ivoclar-Vivadent) and the other with Lava Ultimate (3M Oral Care). Two blind observers evaluated the restorations at baseline and 1 year after the onlays were cemented, according to FDI criteria. At each recall, digital photographs, bite-wing radiographs and impressions of the restorations were taken for SEM evaluation of the interface. Results were analyzed by Mann–Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests (p < 0.05). At baseline and in the 1-year recall, both CAD/CAM materials exhibited excellent results in most criteria with similar esthetic, functional and biological properties (p > 0.05). However, deterioration in surface lustre (p = 0.020) and color match/translucency (p = 0.039) were detected for IPS e.max CAD onlays after 1-year. Under SEM evaluation, there were no statistically differences in micromorphological criteria at baseline nor after a year between IPS e.max CAD and Lava Ultimate onlays. Conclusion: After 1 year of clinical service IPS e.max CAD and Lava Ultimate onlays showed a similar clinical performance that needs to be confirmed in long-term evaluations.

Clinical Performance of Indirect Composite Onlays as Esthetic Alternative to Stainless Steel Crowns for Rehabilitation of a Large Carious Primary Molar

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 345-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hitesh Chander Mittal ◽  
Ashima Goyal ◽  
Krishan Gauba ◽  
Aditi Kapur
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Study Groups ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Primary Molar ◽  
Secondary Caries ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Gingival Health

Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical performance of indirect resin composite onlays (IRC onlay) compared to stainless steel crowns (SSCs), as an esthetic alternative for rehabilitation of extensively carious primary molars. Study design: Fifty pediatric patients each received either IRC onlay or SSC randomly on extensively carious endodontically treated primary molars. All the restorations were evaluated at baseline and then every 6 months till 36 months using ‘modified FDI criteria’ for retention, marginal integrity, occlusion, proximal contact, secondary caries and gingival health. The dental chair side treatment time and post-operative acceptability were also evaluated for both the groups. Results: The cumulative survival rate of IRC onlays was 82.9% compared to 90.7% for SSCs over a time period of 36 months. The difference between the two study groups at various time intervals in terms of retention, marginal integrity, secondary caries, proximal contact, occlusion and gingival health was not statistically significant (p&gt;0.05). The IRC onlays required significantly less mean chair side treatment time and were preferred the most by parents and children as per VAS scores compared to SSCs. Conclusion: IRC onlays are an acceptable esthetic alternative to SSCs and may be considered for use in aesthetically conscious children/parents as per their preference.

Two-year Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trial of a Flowable and Conventional Composite in Class I Restorations

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 594-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
NC Lawson ◽  
R Radhakrishnan ◽  
DA Givan ◽  
LC Ramp ◽  
JO Burgess
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class I ◽  
Cold Sensitivity ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Volumetric Wear ◽  
Secondary Caries ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Year

SUMMARY Objectives This study evaluated the two-year clinical performance and volumetric wear of a flowable resin composite compared to a conventional highly filled composite resin in Class I restorations. Methods and Materials In this single-center, single-blinded, comparator-controlled clinical study (Institutional Review Board approved), 120 carious teeth distributed in 60 patients were randomly assigned to four calibrated practitioners who placed occlusal restorations (n=60 flowable and n=60 conventional composite). Direct and indirect assessment at baseline, six months, one year, and two years occurred during which the modified Cvar and Ryge criteria were evaluated. Volumetric wear was determined by superimposition of profilometer scans of baseline and two-year casts. Results At two years, there was no significant difference in anatomic form (p=0.80), color match (p=0.08), marginal adaptation (p=0.89), marginal discoloration (p=0.79), surface integrity (p=0.18), secondary caries (p=0.66), cold sensitivity (p=0.522), occlusal sensitivity (p=0.818), or volumetric wear (p=0.661) between materials. Both materials showed a decrease in all criteria except secondary caries (p=0.95) over time. Two-year mean volumetric wear was 3.16 ± 2.38 mm3 for the flowable composite and 3.43 ± 2.50 mm3 for the conventional composite. Conclusions The flowable and conventional composites used in this study have similar clinical efficacy after two years of service when placed as Class I occlusal restorations having isthmus widths less than one-half the intercuspal distance.

scholarly journals Marginal Integrity of Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Class II Composite Restorations

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Al-Harbi ◽  
D Kaisarly ◽  
D Bader ◽  
M El Gezawi
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Sandwich Technique ◽  
Thermomechanical Cycling ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Maxillary Premolars ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Bulk-fill composites have been introduced to facilitate the placement of deep direct resin composite restorations. This study aimed at analyzing the cervical marginal integrity of bulk-fill vs incremental and open-sandwich class II resin composite restorations after thermomechanical cycling using replica scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and ranking according to the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Box-only class II cavities were prepared in 91 maxillary premolars with the gingival margin placed 1 mm above and below the cemento-enamel junction. Eighty-four premolars were divided into self-etch and total-etch groups, then subdivided into six restorative subgroups (n=7): 1-Tetric Ceram HB (TC) was used incrementally and in the open-sandwich technique with 2-Tetric EvoFlow (EF) and 3-Smart Dentin Replacement (SD). Bulk-fill restoratives were 4-SonicFill (SF), 5-Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (TN), and 6-Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TE). In subgroups 1-5, Tetric N-Bond self-etch and Tetric N-Bond total-etch adhesives were used, whereas in subgroup 6, AdheSE self-etch and ExciTE F total etch were used. One more group (n=7) was restored with Filtek P90 Low Shrink Posterior Restorative (P9) only in combination with its self-etch P90 System Adhesive. Materials were manipulated and light cured (20 seconds, 1600 mW/cm2), and restorations were artificially aged by thermo-occlusal load cycling. Polyvinyl-siloxane impressions were taken and poured with epoxy resin. Resin replicas were examined by SEM (200×) for marginal sealing, and percentages of perfect margins were analyzed. Moreover, samples were examined using loupes (3.5×) and explorers and categorized according to the FDI criteria. Results were statistically analyzed (SEM by Kruskal-Wallis test and FDI by chi-square test) without significant differences in either the replica SEM groups (p=0.848) or the FDI criteria groups (p&gt;0.05). The best SEM results at the enamel margin were in TC+EF/total-etch and SF/total-etch and at the cementum margins were in SF/total-etch and TE/self-etch, while the worst were in TC/self-etch at both margins. According to FDI criteria, the best was TE/total-etch at the enamel margin, and the poorest was P9/self-etch at the cementum margin. Groups did not differ significantly, and there was a strong correlation in results between replica SEM and FDI ranking.

One-Year Clinical Evaluation of Composite Restorations in Posterior Teeth: Effect of Adhesive Systems

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. E30-E37 ◽  
Author(s):  
RH Sundfeld ◽  
RS Scatolin ◽  
FG Oliveira ◽  
LS Machado ◽  
RS Alexandre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
One Year

SUMMARY This clinical study assessed the performance of posterior composite resins applied with the Adper™ Single Bond Plus (SB) and Adper™ Scotchbond SE (SE) adhesive systems and Filtek™ Supreme Plus composite resin, using modified US Public Health Service criteria. A total of 97 restorations were placed in posterior teeth by two calibrated operators. Application of the materials followed manufacturers' instructions. The restorations were evaluated by two examiners at baseline and after one year. Statistical analyses were conducted using the proportion test at a significance level of 5% (p&lt;0.05). All the restorations evaluated (ie, 100%) received an alpha rating for the criteria of marginal discoloration and marginal integrity at baseline. At one year, for marginal discoloration, 64.6% of SB and 61.2% of SE received an alpha rating. For marginal integrity, 72.9% of SB and 77.6% of SE received an alpha rating. The other restorations received bravo ratings for both criteria. None of the teeth that received the restorative systems presented caries lesions around the restorations. A total of eight teeth presented postoperative sensitivity one week after baseline, five with SB and three with SE; the symptom had disappeared one year later. One year later, composite resin restorations using either adhesive system showed satisfactory clinical performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document