Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical performance of a nano-fill and a bulk fill resin composite in class II restorations.
In accordance with a split-mouth design, 50 patients will be received at least one pair of restorations, restored with a nanofill resin composite (Filtek Ultimate [FU]) and with a bulk fill resin composite (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill [TB]). Each restorative resin will be used with its respective adhesive system according to the manufacturers' instructions. A total of 104 class II restorations will be placed by two operators. The restorations will be blindly evaluated by two examiners at baseline and at 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, 7- and 8- year using modified US Public Health Service Ryge criteria. The comparison of the two restorative materials for each category will be performed with the chi-square test (a=0.05). The baseline scores will be compared with those at the recall visits using the Cochran Q-test.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk-fill resin composite | Experimental | Bulk-fill resin composite will be places with bulk technique. |
|
| Nano-fill resin composite | Active Comparator | Nano-fill resin composite will be placed with 2 mm thickness layering technique. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bulk-fill | Device | Bulk-fill resin composite (bulk technique) |
| |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Marginal adaptation | Observers will evaluate the restorations will be performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation. Marginal adaptation will evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches will be performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Harmonious outline Alpha 2: Marginal gap (max 100μ) with discoloration (removable) Bravo: Marginal gap (> 100μ) with discoloration (unremovable) Charlie: The restoration is fractured or missed. | From baseline to 8 year the change of restorations will be evaluated |
| Marginal discoloration | Observers will evaluate the restorations will be performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal discoloration. Marginal discoloration will be evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches will be performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha: No discoloration anywhere along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Bravo: Slight discoloration along the margin between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Charlie: The discoloration penetrated along the margin of the restorative material in a pulpal direction. | From baseline to 8 year the change of restorations will be evaluated |
| Retention | Observers will evaluate the restorations will be performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate. Retention rate will be evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C and D score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1:Clinically excellent Alpha 2: Clinically good with slight deviations from ideal performance, correction possible without damage of tooth or restoration Bravo: Clinically sufficient with few defects, corrections or repair of the restoration possible Charlie: Restoration is partially missed Delta: Restoration is totally missed |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Ayse R Yazici, DDS, PhD | Hacettepe University School of Dentistry | Study Director |
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| PUBMED | View source |
| PUBMED | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003731 | Dental Caries |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D017001 | Tooth Demineralization |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Nano-fill |
| Device |
Nano-fill resin composite (layering technique) |
|
| From baseline to 8 year the change of restorations will be evaluated |
| Anatomic form | Observers will evaluate the restorations will be performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding anatomic form. Anatomic form will be evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failed and needs to be replaced. Alpha 1: Continuous with existing anatomical form Alpha 2: Slightly discontinuous due to some chipping on the proximal ridge Bravo: Discontinuous with existing anatomical form due to material loss but proximal contact still present Charlie: Proximal contact is lost with ridge fracture. | From baseline to 8 year the change of restorations will be evaluated |
| Color change | Observers will evaluate the restorations will be performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding color change. Color changes will be evaluated by 2 independent clinicians. Visual inspection with a mirror at 18 inches was performed . A score means the higher score of clinical acceptability while C score means that the restoration has failedand needs to be replaced. Alpha: The restoration matches the adjacent tooth structure in color and translucency. Bravo: Light mismatch in color, shade or translucency between the restoration and the adjacent tooth. Charlie: The mismatch in color and translucency is outside the acceptable range of tooth color and translucency. | From baseline to 8 year the change of restorations will be evaluated |