Cargando…
Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial
BACKGROUND: Self-adhering flowable composite (SAFC) minimized the time-consuming application procedures encountered with the traditional adhesive systems and restorative materials. Self-adhering composite combines the merits of both adhesive and restorative material technologies (8(th) generation) i...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6161520/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30294107 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_210_18 |
_version_ | 1783359005534453760 |
---|---|
author | Shaalan, Omar Osama Abou-Auf, Eman El Zoghby, Amira Farid |
author_facet | Shaalan, Omar Osama Abou-Auf, Eman El Zoghby, Amira Farid |
author_sort | Shaalan, Omar Osama |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Self-adhering flowable composite (SAFC) minimized the time-consuming application procedures encountered with the traditional adhesive systems and restorative materials. Self-adhering composite combines the merits of both adhesive and restorative material technologies (8(th) generation) in a single product, bringing new horizons, and ambitions to restorative procedures. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of SAFC compared to conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a split-mouth design, after cavity preparation, 18 patients with conservative Class I cavities received randomly two pairs of restorations, either Vertise™ flow or Filtek™ Z350 XT Flowable combined with Scotchbond™ Universal Etchant and Single Bond Universal, all materials were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months by two calibrated assessors using the modified United States Public Health Service criteria measuring (retention, postoperative hypersensitivity, color match, marginal adaptation, and marginal discoloration). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Chi-square test was used to compare between flowable composite materials after different follow-up periods, Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to explore changes over follow-up periods. A value of P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: At baseline and 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between both materials for all tested outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SAFC has shown clinical performance similar to conventional flowable composite after 6 months of clinical service. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6161520 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61615202018-10-05 Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial Shaalan, Omar Osama Abou-Auf, Eman El Zoghby, Amira Farid J Conserv Dent Original Article BACKGROUND: Self-adhering flowable composite (SAFC) minimized the time-consuming application procedures encountered with the traditional adhesive systems and restorative materials. Self-adhering composite combines the merits of both adhesive and restorative material technologies (8(th) generation) in a single product, bringing new horizons, and ambitions to restorative procedures. AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of SAFC compared to conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a split-mouth design, after cavity preparation, 18 patients with conservative Class I cavities received randomly two pairs of restorations, either Vertise™ flow or Filtek™ Z350 XT Flowable combined with Scotchbond™ Universal Etchant and Single Bond Universal, all materials were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months by two calibrated assessors using the modified United States Public Health Service criteria measuring (retention, postoperative hypersensitivity, color match, marginal adaptation, and marginal discoloration). STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Chi-square test was used to compare between flowable composite materials after different follow-up periods, Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to explore changes over follow-up periods. A value of P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: At baseline and 6 months, there was no statistically significant difference between both materials for all tested outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: SAFC has shown clinical performance similar to conventional flowable composite after 6 months of clinical service. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6161520/ /pubmed/30294107 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_210_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Shaalan, Omar Osama Abou-Auf, Eman El Zoghby, Amira Farid Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title | Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title_full | Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title_short | Clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative Class I cavities: Randomized controlled trial |
title_sort | clinical evaluation of self-adhering flowable composite versus conventional flowable composite in conservative class i cavities: randomized controlled trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6161520/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30294107 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_210_18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT shaalanomarosama clinicalevaluationofselfadheringflowablecompositeversusconventionalflowablecompositeinconservativeclassicavitiesrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT abouaufeman clinicalevaluationofselfadheringflowablecompositeversusconventionalflowablecompositeinconservativeclassicavitiesrandomizedcontrolledtrial AT elzoghbyamirafarid clinicalevaluationofselfadheringflowablecompositeversusconventionalflowablecompositeinconservativeclassicavitiesrandomizedcontrolledtrial |