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 purpose of this 12-month randomized clinical investigation was to compare the clinical performance of posterior composite resin restorations implanted in vital teeth using various placement techniques.
Because of their conservative nature, aesthetic qualities, and consistently improved mechanical performance and handling features, resin-based composites have become the restorative material of choice for posterior teeth. Nevertheless, significant obstacles influencing the stability of the marginal area, sensitivity following the procedure, and the durability and effectiveness of composite restorations in the long run are polymerization shrinkage and stress associated with shrinkage.
To reduce polymerization stress and maximize adaptability to hollow walls, various placement procedures have been suggested. While older incremental layering methods sought to lessen the configuration factor (C-factor) and increase light penetration, more recent methods like the Stamp and Snowplow approaches sought to replicate the occlusal architecture and enhance marginal sealing. Conversely, bulk-fill techniques were first developed to streamline clinical processes by enabling the use of bigger composite layers with the promise of lower shrinkage stress.
Despite a plethora of in vitro studies, there is a dearth of high-quality clinical data that compares these placement methods under controlled settings. Due to the fact that laboratory studies cannot completely replicate the oral environment, clinical trials continue to be the best way to assess the real-world efficacy of restorative procedures.
Consequently, this randomized clinical trial set out to assess the clinical efficacy of posterior composite restorations placed in vital teeth utilizing four distinct procedures over the course of a year
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| incremental nanohybrid composite | Experimental | Stamp technique |
|
| Flowable and nanohybrid composite | Experimental | Snowplow technique |
|
| incremental layering technique | Experimental | Modified incremental "Pizza" technique |
|
| bulk fill composite resin | Experimental | Bulk-fill technique |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| nanohybrid composite resin | Other | Fifty patients received a total of 200 Class I composite restorations, which were placed using the same nanohybrid composite resin and randomly allocated into four groups (n = 50) according to placement technique: Group I-Stamp technique; Group II-Snowplow technique; Group III-Modified incremental "Pizza" technique; and Group IV-Bulk-fill technique |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The primary outcome was marginal adaptation | Clinical evaluation of marginal adaptation was performed according to the World Dental Federation (FDI) by two calibrated evaluators at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months. All of the restorations were ranked according to how well they met the criteria: score 1 (clinically excellent), score 2 (clinically satisfactory), score 3 (clinically satisfactory), or scores 4 and 5 (clinically inadequate). Clinical success was defined as a score of 1, 2, or 3, and failure was indicated by scores of 4 or 5. A powerful light source was used to conduct the visual inspection of the parameters. A magnifying dental loupe was utilized for this purpose. The Friedman test was conducted to evaluate intragroup comparisons of the same restoration outcomes through different follow-up periods. The Kruskal-Wallis test was utilized to assess intergroup comparisons between different restorations during the same follow-up period. Time Frame: 24 months | 24 months |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Restorative Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University | Tanta | Tanta | 31527 | Egypt | ||
| Restorative Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 35836552 | Background | Karunakar P, Ranga Reddy MS, Kumar BS, Namratha R. Direct and indirect stamp techniques for composite restorations - Sealing the uniqueness of a tooth: A case series. J Conserv Dent. 2022 May-Jun;25(3):327-331. doi: 10.4103/jcd.jcd_616_21. Epub 2022 Jun 13. | |
| 41241559 | Result | Paolone G, Coccoluto L, Cortili S, Collivasone G, Cantatore G, Gherlone EF. Copolymerizing flowable and high-viscosity composite resins in class II restorations: The "Snowplow" technique. A scoping review. J Prosthet Dent. 2026 May;135(5):e1-e11. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2025.10.058. Epub 2025 Nov 14. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Tanta |
| Tanta |
| Egypt |
| Faculty of Dentistry | Tanta | Egypt |
| 39341448 | Result | Zhu J, Fu C, Deng X, Ma L, Song F, Huang C. Effects of stamp material and restoration depth on the accuracy of direct composite resin restorations using stamp technique. J Dent. 2024 Nov;150:105369. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105369. Epub 2024 Sep 26. |
| 36161755 | Result | Vertuan M, Mosquim V, Guimaraes GMF, Obeid AT, Bombonatti JFS, Ishikiriama SK, Furuse AY. The stamp technique for direct restoration in a ICDAS 4 carious lesion: A 4-year follow-up. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2023 Apr;35(3):442-448. doi: 10.1111/jerd.12963. Epub 2022 Sep 26. |
| 40479542 | Result | Desai D. "Stamp" Technique to Recreate Accurate Occlusal Topography for Direct Composite Posterior Restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2025 May;46(5):236-239. |
| 36975574 | Result | Zotti F, Vincenzi S, Zangani A, Bernardi P, Sbarbati A. Stamp Technique: An Explorative SEM Analysis. Dent J (Basel). 2023 Mar 8;11(3):77. doi: 10.3390/dj11030077. |
| 42272133 | Derived | Mohammed MAEG, Naser AS, Abozaid D. Clinical Performance of Bulk-Fill Versus Incremental Composite Placement Approaches in Vital Posterior Teeth: A 24 Months Randomized Controlled Trial. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2026 Jun 10. doi: 10.1111/jerd.70202. Online ahead of print. |