Clinical performance of a glass-hybrid system in comparison with a resin composite in two-surface class II restorations: a 5-year randomised multi-centre study

Abstract

Abstract Objective To evaluate the 5-year clinical performance of a glass hybrid restorative system and a nano-hybrid resin composite in moderate to large two-surface class II cavities. Materials and methods This study was carried out by dental schools in Zagreb, Croatia; Izmir, Turkey; Belgrade, Serbia; and Milan, Italy. A total of 180 patients requiring two class-II two-surface restorations in the molars of the same jaw were recruited. The teeth were randomly restored with either a nano-hybrid resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram, Ivoclar Vivadent) or a glass-hybrid material (EQUIA Forte, GC). During the 5-year follow-up, two calibrated evaluators at each centre scored the restorations annually using the FDI-2 scoring system. The survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and compared using non-parametric matched pair tests (p < 0.05). Results There were no statistically significant differences between the overall survival and success rates of the two types of restorations (p>0.05). The success rates (FDI-2 scores 1–3) for EQUIA Forte were 81.9% (average annual failure rate: 3.9%) and 90.7% for Tetric EvoCeram (average annual failure rate: 1.9%). The survival rates (FDI-2 scores 1–4) for EQUIA Forte and Tetric EvoCeram were 94.5% and 94.4%, respectively, with an average annual failure rate of 1.1%. Conclusions In terms of success and survival rates, both the glass-hybrid restorative system and the nano-hybrid resin composite have been shown to perform satisfactorily. Clinical relevance The results of this study indicate that EQUIA Forte can be one of the therapeutic options for moderate to large two-surface class II restorations of posterior teeth.