One Year Clinical Evaluation of a Low Shrinkage Composite Compared with a Packable Composite Resin: A Randomized Clinical Trial
,
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a packable and a low shrinkage methacrylate-based composite after one year.
Materials and Methods:In this clinical trial, 50 class I or II restorations were placed in 25 patients. Each patient received two restorations. The tested materials were: (I) Filtek P60 + Single Bond 2 and (II) Kalore GC + Single Bond 2. The restorations were evaluated by two independent examiners after one week (baseline), six months and one year according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. The evaluated parameters included color match, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, retention, surface texture, postoperative sensitivity, marginal staining and secondary caries. Data were then analyzed using Friedman and conditional (matched) logistic regression tests at P<0.05 level of significance.
Results: P60 and Kalore performed similarly at six months and one year (P>0.05). When each composite resin was evaluated independently at baseline and after one year, no statistically significant differences were found except for marginal adaptation (P60) where four restorations were rated Bravo (clinically acceptable). In 8% of restorations, patients expressed postoperative sensitivity.
Conclusions: Kalore GC and Filtek P60 showed acceptance clinical performance after one year of service.
- Baracco B, Perdigão J, Cabrera E, Giráldez I, Ceballos L. Clinical evaluation of a low-shrinkage composite in posterior restorations: one-year results. Oper Dent. 2012 Mar-Apr;37(2):117-29.
- Ferracane JL. Resin composite--state of the art. Dent Mater. 2011 Jan;27(1):29-38.
- da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, Loguércio AD, Demarco FF. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent. 2006 Aug;34(7):427-35.
- Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report. J J Adhes Dent. 2001 Summer;3(2):185-94.
- Karthick K, Sivakumar K, Geetha Priya PR, Shankar S. Polymerization shrinkage of composites–a review. JIADS. 2011;2(2):32-6.
- Bagis YH, Baltacioglu IH, Kahyaogullari S. Comparing microleakage and the layering methods of Silorane-based resin composite in wide Class II MOD cavities. Oper Dent. 2009 Sep-Oct;34(5):578-85.
- Baracco B, Fuentes MV, Ceballos L. Five-year clinical performance of a silorane- vs a methacrylate-based composite combined with two different adhesive approaches. Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Jun;20(5):991-1001.
- Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater. 2005 Jan;21(1):68-74.
- Terry DA, Leinfelder KF, Blatz MB. A comparison of advanced resin monomer technologies. Dent Today. 2009 Jul;28(7):122-3.
- Loguercio AD, Reis A, Rodrigues Filho LE, Busato AL. One-year clinical evaluation of posterior packable resin composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2001 Sep-Oct;26(5):427-34.
- Loguercio AD, Reis A, Hernandez PA, Macedo RP, Busato AL. 3‐Year clinical evaluation of posterior packable composite resin restorations. J Oral Rehabil. 2006 Feb;33(2):144-51.
- Pazinatto FB, Gionordoli Neto R, Wang L, Mondelli J, Mondelli RF, Navarro MF. 56-month clinical performance of Class I and II resin composite restorations. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012 May-Jun;20 (3):323-8.
- Kiremitci A, Alpaslan T, Gurgan S. Six-year clinical evaluation of packable composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2009 Jan-Feb;34(1):11-7.
- Gianordoli Neto R, Santiago SL, Mendonça JS, Passos VF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF. One year clinical evaluation of two different types of composite resins in posterior teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008 May 1;9(4):26-33.
- Yazici AR, Ustunkol I, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B. Three-year clinical evaluation of different restorative resins in class I restorations. Oper Dent. 2014 May-Jun;39(3):248-55.
- Briso AL, Mestrener SR, Delício G, Sundfeld RH, Bedran-Russo AK, de Alexandre RS, et al. Clinical assessment of postoperative sensitivity in posterior composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2007 Sep-Oct;32(5):421-6.
- Stangel I, Barolet RY. Clinical evaluation of two posterior composite resins: two‐year results. J Oral Rehabil. 1990 May;17(3):257-68.
- Opdam NJ, Feilzer AJ, Roeters JJ, Smale I. Class I occlusal composite resin restorations: in vivo post-operative sensitivity, wall adaptation, and microleakage. Am J Dent. 1998 Oct;11(5):229-34.
- Amin M, Naz F, Sheikh A, Ahmed A. Post-operative sensitivity in teeth restored with posterior dental composites using self-etch and total-etch adhesives. JPDA. 2015;24(1):22-28.
- Ivanović V, Savić-Stanković T, Karadžić B, Ilić J, Santini A, Beljić-Ivanović K. Postoperative sensitivity associated with low shrinkage versus conventional composites. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2013 Jul-Aug;141(7-8):447-53.
- Fukushima M, Setcos JC, Phillips RW. Marginal fracture of posterior composite resins. J Am Dent Assoc. 1988 Oct;117(5):577-83.
- Baracco B, Perdigão J, Cabrera E, Ceballos L. Two-year clinical performance of a low-shrinkage composite in posterior restorations. Oper Dent. 2013 Nov-Dec;38(6):591-600.
- Jefferies SR. The art and science of abrasive finishing and polishing in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 1998 Oct;42(4):613-27.
- Marghalani HY. Effect of finishing/polishing systems on the surface roughness of novel posterior composites. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2010 Apr;22(2): 127-38.
- Condon JR, Ferracane JL. Evaluation of composite wear with a new multi-mode oral wear simulator. Dent Mater. 1996 Jul;12(4):218-26.
- Ferreira PM, Souto SH, Borges BC, de Assunção IV, da Costa GD. Impact of a novel polishing method on the surface roughness and micromorphology of nanofilled and microhybrid composite resins. Rev Port deEstomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac. 2015 Jan-Mar;56(1):18-24.
- Collins CJ, Bryant RW, Hodge KL. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings. J Dent. 1998 May;26(4):311-7.
- Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater. 2012 Jan;28(1):87-101.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 14, No 2 (2017) | |
| Section | Original Article | |
| Keywords | ||
| Composite Resins Dental Marginal Adaptation Patients | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
