Affiliation:
1. University Outpatient Clinic for Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, Department of Dentistry, Medical Faculty, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Magdeburger Strasse 16, 06112 Halle, Germany
Abstract
The purpose of this randomized, split-mouth-designed controlled and single-blinded clinical study was to evaluate the 3-year clinical performance of Class I and Class II resin composite restorations placed with or without cavity lining with a flowable composite. Fifty patients with treatment needs in two premolars or molars were included. One of the teeth was restored using the nanohybrid composite (Grandio®SO, control group), in the test group a high viscosity flowable composite was additionally applied as a first layer. In both groups, the same self-etch adhesive system was applied. Clinical evaluation after 3 years was carried out using the modified USPHS/Ryge criteria. At the 3-year follow-up the recall rate was 92%. Four restorations failed in the test group (8.7%), three due to the loss of vitality and one after fracture. The control group exhibited a cumulative success rate of 100%, while the test group achieved a success rate of 91.3%. This led to significant differences in the annual failure rate (AFR) between the two groups, with rates of 0% and 2.9% (p < 0.05; Mann–Whitney U-test). After 3 years the cumulative survival rate including all restorations was 95.7%. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences for the parameters: tooth vitality, marginal discoloration, success rate, and AFR. The other parameters exhibited no significant differences. Consequently, the nanohybrid composite demonstrated excellent performance over a 3-year period, whereas the utilization of a flowable composite for the cavity lining did not appear to exert a beneficial influence on clinical outcomes.
Reference67 articles.
1. Clinical performance of direct composite resin versus indirect restorations on endodontically treated posterior teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis;Cune;J. Prosthet. Dent.,2023
2. Randomized clinical trial on indirect resin composite and ceramic laminate veneers: Up to 10-year findings;Gresnigt;J. Dent.,2019
3. A prospective, randomized clinical trial of a two-step self-etching vs two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive and SEM margin analysis: Four-year results;Boeckler;J. Adhes. Dent.,2012
4. Marginal adaptation and CAD-CAM technology: A systematic review of restorative material and fabrication techniques;Papadiochou;J. Prosthet. Dent.,2018
5. A prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial of a one-step, self-etch adhesive with and without an intermediary layer of a flowable composite: A 2-year evaluation;Boeckler;Quintessence Int.,2012