One-year results of a novel self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative and a conventional bulk-fill composite in class II cavities-a randomized clinical split-mouth study

被引:10
|
作者
Cieplik, Fabian [1 ]
Scholz, Konstantin J. [1 ]
Anthony, Julian C. [1 ]
Tabenski, Isabelle [1 ]
Ettenberger, Sarah [1 ]
Hiller, Karl-Anton [1 ]
Buchalla, Wolfgang [1 ]
Federlin, Marianne [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Regensburg, Dept Conservat Dent & Periodontol, Franz Josef Str Allee 11, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany
关键词
Class II; Filtek one; Self-adhesive; RBC; Bulk-fill; FLOWABLE COMPOSITE; RESIN COMPOSITES; CERVICAL LESIONS; SURVIVAL; ENAMEL; PERFORMANCE; LONGEVITY; STRENGTH;
D O I
10.1007/s00784-021-04019-y
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives In the context of the phase-down of amalgam, development of easily applicable, permanent restorative materials is of high clinical interest. Aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel, tooth-colored, self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative (SABF, 3M Oral Care) and a conventional bulk-fill composite (Filtek One, 3M Oral Care; FOBF) for restoring class II cavities. The null-hypothesis tested was that both materials perform similar regarding clinical performance. Materials and methods In this randomized split-mouth study, 30 patients received one SABF and one FOBF restoration each. Scotchbond Universal (3M Oral Care) was used as adhesive for FOBF (self-etch mode), while SABF was applied directly without adhesive. Restorations were evaluated by two blinded examiners at baseline, 6 months and 12 months employing FDI criteria. Non-parametric statistical analyses and chi(2)-tests (alpha = 0.05) were applied. Results Thirty patients (60 restorations) were available for the 6- and 12-month recalls exhibiting 100% restoration survival. All restorations revealed clinically acceptable FDI scores at all time points and for all criteria. Only regarding esthetic properties, FOBF performed significantly better than SABF regarding surface lustre (A1) and color match and translucency (A3) at all time points and marginal staining (A2b) at 12 months. Conclusions The null-hypothesis could not be rejected. Both materials performed similarly regarding clinical performance within the first year of clinical service. SABF exhibited slightly inferior, but clinically fully acceptable esthetic properties as compared to FOBF.
引用
收藏
页码:449 / 461
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] One-year results of a novel self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative and a conventional bulk-fill composite in class II cavities—a randomized clinical split-mouth study
    Fabian Cieplik
    Konstantin J. Scholz
    Julian C. Anthony
    Isabelle Tabenski
    Sarah Ettenberger
    Karl-Anton Hiller
    Wolfgang Buchalla
    Marianne Federlin
    [J]. Clinical Oral Investigations, 2022, 26 : 449 - 461
  • [2] Randomized clinical split-mouth study on a novel self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative vs. a conventional bulk-fill composite for restoration of class II cavities - results after three years
    Cieplik, Fabian
    Hiller, Karl-Anton
    Buchalla, Wolfgang
    Federlin, Marianne
    Scholz, Konstantin J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2022, 125
  • [3] A randomized clinical split-mouth trial of a bulk-fill and a nanohybrid composite restorative in class II cavities: Three-year results
    Sekundo, Caroline
    Fazeli, Shila
    Felten, Anna
    Schoilew, Kyrill
    Wolff, Diana
    Frese, Cornelia
    [J]. DENTAL MATERIALS, 2022, 38 (05) : 759 - 768
  • [4] One-year clinical results of restorations using a novel self-adhesive resin-based bulk-fill restorative
    Andreas Rathke
    Frank Pfefferkorn
    Michael K. McGuire
    Rick H. Heard
    Rainer Seemann
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 12
  • [5] One-year clinical results of restorations using a novel self-adhesive resin-based bulk-fill restorative
    Rathke, Andreas
    Pfefferkorn, Frank
    McGuire, Michael K.
    Heard, Rick H.
    Seemann, Rainer
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2022, 12 (01)
  • [6] Clinical evaluation of bulk-fill and universal nanocomposites in class II cavities: Five-year results of a randomized clinical split-mouth trial
    Schoilew, Kyrill
    Fazeli, Shila
    Felten, Anna
    Sekundo, Caroline
    Wolff, Diana
    Frese, Cornelia
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2023, 128
  • [7] Postoperative sensitivity in posterior restorations restored with self-adhesive and conventional bulk-fill resin composites: A randomized clinical split-mouth trial
    Maghaireh, Ghada A.
    Albashaireh, Zakereyya S.
    Allouz, Hadeel A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, 2023, 137
  • [8] Comparative clinical evaluation between self-adhesive and conventional bulk-fill composites in class II cavities: A 1-year randomized controlled clinical study
    Ellithy, Mohamed S.
    Abdelrahman, Mohamed H.
    Afifi, Rania R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ESTHETIC AND RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, 2024, 36 (09) : 1311 - 1325
  • [9] Characterization of Contemporary Conventional, Bulk-fill, and Self-adhesive Resin Composite Materials
    David, C.
    Cuevas-Suarez, C. E.
    de Cardoso, G. C.
    Isolan, C. P.
    de Moraes, R. R.
    da Rosa, W. L. O.
    Munchow, E. A.
    da Silva, A. F.
    [J]. OPERATIVE DENTISTRY, 2022, 47 (04) : 392 - 402
  • [10] A randomized, prospective clinical study evaluating effectiveness of a bulk-fill composite resin, a conventional composite resin and a reinforced glass ionomer in Class II cavities: one-year results
    Balkaya, Hacer
    Arslan, Soley
    Pala, Kansad
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ORAL SCIENCE, 2019, 27