Dataset Information

Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

This is a double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical study that aims to evaluate the influence of bulk-fill composite packaging presented in syringes (BSy) and capsules (BCa), and the effect of selective enamel etching (SEE) on the clinical performance of class I and II bulk-fill resin composite restorations after 24 months.

Methodology

A total of 295 class I or class II restorations were performed on 70 patients. One universal adhesive was applied in all restorations. SEE was used in 148 restorations and self-etching mode (SET) in 147 restorations. After the adhesive application, cavities were restored with Filtek Bulk-fill Posterior Restorative in syringes (BSy), Filtek One Bulk-fill in capsules (BCa), or Filtek Supreme Ultra in syringes with the incremental technique (In). All restorations were evaluated using the FDI criteria after one week and after six, 12, and 24 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Pearson's Chi-square test were used (α=0.05) for statistical analysis.

Results

After 24 months, 62 patients were evaluated and four restorations were lost due to fracture (one for SEEBSy, two for SEEIn, and one for SETIn). No significant differences in the fracture and retention rate were found between groups (p>0.05). SEE showed significantly fewer marginal adaptation defects than SET (p<0.05). BCa and BSy groups showed fewer marginal discrepancies compared to In (p<0.05). Restorations performed with BCa showed less color mismatch than BSy or In (p<0.05).

Conclusion

Although all restorations exhibited satisfactory clinical performance after 24 months of clinical service, the clinical behavior of class I and II restorations' improved when performed with a bulk-fill composite in capsules, mainly when associated with a universal adhesive applied with SEE.

SUBMITTER: Barceleiro MO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9972856 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial.

Barceleiro Marcos de Oliveira MO Tardem Chane C Albuquerque Elisa Gomes EG Lopes Leticia de Souza LS Marins Stella Soares SS Poubel Luiz Augusto LA Barcelos Roberta R Ñaupari-Villasante Romina R Loguercio Alessandro Dourado AD Calazans Fernanda Signorelli FS

Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB 20230213

<h4>Objectives</h4>This is a double-blind, split-mouth, randomized clinical study that aims to evaluate the influence of bulk-fill composite packaging presented in syringes (BSy) and capsules (BCa), and the effect of selective enamel etching (SEE) on the clinical performance of class I and II bulk-fill resin composite restorations after 24 months.<h4>Methodology</h4>A total of 295 class I or class II restorations were performed on 70 patients. One universal adhesive was applied in all restoratio ...[more]

PMID: 36790298

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite recent advances in restorative dentistry adhesive restorations may cause postoperative sensitivity which leads to restoration failure.AimThis study aimed to compare and evaluate the incremental and bulk fill resin Composite postoperative sensitivity in class II posterior restorations bonded with two adhesive systems (self-etch and etch-and-rinse).MethodsSixty patients were randomly selected, their age range from twenty-five to forty years old, divided into two groups according to the packing technique of resin composite material; incremental Tetric Evoceram and Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite. Thirty patients (n = 30) for incremental Tetric Evoceram resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth).Thirty patients (n = 30) for Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used (etch and rinse or self-etch), they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth). Post-operative pain assessed at 24 hours, 1 week and 1 month using the Visual Analog Scale Score (VAS). Each patient was instructed to put a mark on the VAS line at home to point out the intensity of pain at each assessment period. The problem of measuring the pain that pain tolerance of individuals may be different from the others. This may be due to different reasons, and it is not always because of a problem in the restoration.ResultsAfter 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month, no statistically significant disagreement between the two resin composite types using self-etch adhesive strategy and total-etch adhesive strategy. Also, when the two adhesive systems were compared using Bulk Fill resin composite and incremental Nano resin composite no statistically significant disagreement between the two adhesive systems after 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month.ConclusionThe post-operative hypersensitivity is related to many factors as the procedure of cavity preparation, adhesive approach, and type of resin composite used and placement technique of the resin composite.

Project description:Polymerization shrinkage of resin composite can compromise the longevity of restorations. To minimize this problem, the monomeric composition of composites have been modified. The objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the clinical behavior of restorations performed with low polymerization shrinkage resin composite in comparison with traditional methacrylates-based resin composite. This systematic review was registered at Prospero data system (CRD42015023940). Studies were searched in the electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Lilacs and EMBASE according to a predefined search strategy. The inclusion criteria were as follow: (1) randomized controlled clinical trials with at least six months of follow-up; (2) studies investigating composites with monomers designed to reduce polymerization shrinkage; (3) studies conducted with class I or II restorations in the permanent dentition; and (4) studies that assessed at least one of the following criteria: marginal integrity/adaptation, marginal discoloration, recurent caries, retention of composite restorations, and postoperative sensitivity. Two independent reviewers analyzed the articles to determine inclusion and risk of bias. The search conducted in the databases resulted in a total of 14,217 studies. After reviewing the references and citations, 21 articles remained. The longest clinical follow-up time was 60 months. The meta-analysis of the data in the included studies demonstrated that only one variable (marginal adaptation after 12 months) showed statistically significant outcomes, in which methacrylates-based composites presented significantly better results than resin composites containing modified monomers. The good level of the scientific evidence as well as the overall low risk of bias of the included studies indicate that composites with silorane, ormocer or bulk-fill type modified monomers have a clinical performance similar to conventional resin composites.

Project description:BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the impact of the duration of light curing unit (LCU) usage and the use of infection control barriers on the hardness of Bulk Fill composite resin after curing. The hypotheses were that extended usage of the LCU would not reduces its output power and resin hardness, and that the presence of polyethylene film barriers exacerbates the reduction in resin hardness.MethodsBased on the absence or presence of polyethylene film (PE) and the number of layers used, a 3M LED curing light (EliparTM DeepCure-S; 3M ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) was divided into three groups: PE0, PE1, and PE3. The curing light was used 30 times daily for 20 s per exposure, at frequencies of 0, 6, and 12 months. Maximum output power tests were conducted for each group of curing lights. Custom-made plastic modules were used to stack Bulk Fill composite resin (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative; 3M ESPE) to a thickness of 4 mm. Each group of curing lights was used to cure the modules in a direct contact manner for 20 s. Vickers hardness measurements were taken at the top and bottom surfaces of the resin specimens using a digital microhardness tester. A one-way or two-way ANOVA analyzed the power of LCUs, Vickers hardness of Bulk Fill composite resin, and hardness decrease percentage across groups. Pairwise comparisons used the Tukey test (α = 0.05).ResultsAs the duration of usage increased, both the power of the curing light and the hardness of the resin significantly decreased. Significant differences were observed in power and resin hardness among the PE0, PE1, and PE3 groups. When the duration of usage was 6 months or less, only multi-layered PE films led to a significant increase in the percentage decrease of hardness of cured resin from top to bottom. However, at 12 months, both single-layer and multi-layered PE films resulted in a significant increase in the percentage decrease of hardness of cured resin from top to bottom.ConclusionThe output power of the light curing unit decreases with prolonged usage, thereby failing to meet the curing requirements of Bulk Fill composite resin. The use of single-layer PE as an infection control barrier is recommended.

Project description:BackgroundClinical studies are being conducted in less strict conditions in order to establish an adequate scientific basis for decision making. The aim of this pragmatic randomized clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of single and multiple-surfaces restorations performed following the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) premises compared with Conventional Treatment (CT) using bulk fill composite restorations in primary and permanent teeth.Methods/designA total of 1,214 5-to-13 year-old children with at least one single or multiple-surface dentin caries lesion in primary or permanent molars will be selected in public schools of Barueri-SP, Brazil. The participants will be randomly assigned into 2 groups: CT (caries removal with bur and restoration performed with Scotchbond™ Universal Adhesive system associated with Filtek Bulk Fill - 3 M/ESPE) and ART (Caries removal with hand instruments and restoration with high viscosity glass ionomer cement Ketac Molar Easy Mix - 3 M/ESPE). Ten untrained dentists will perform the treatment in in dental offices located at public schools. The restorations will be evaluated after 6, 12 and 24 months by an independent trained and calibrated examiner. The restoration and tooth survival, the cost-effectiveness analysis between the two groups and the operators' preferences regarding the techniques will be also evaluated. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test will be applied for the restoration and tooth survival. All the average event rates in the two groups will be modelled and compared with a Cox proportional hazard shared frailty model since there is an operator-cluster effect. The significance level for all analyses will be 5 %.DiscussionOur hypothesis is that despite similar expected effectiveness between ART using high viscosity GIC and conventional treatment using bulk fill composite resin when treating single or multiple-surface in posterior primary and permanent teeth, ART will present superior cost-effectiveness. The results of this trial will support decision-making by clinicians and policy makers.Trial registrationNCT02568917 . Registered on May 10th 2015.

Dataset Information

Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial.

Objectives

Methodology

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets