56-month clinical performance of Class I and II resin composite restorations

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the 56-month clinical performance of Class I and II resin composite restorations. Filtek P60 was compared with Filtek Z250, which are both indicated for posterior restorations but differ in terms of handling characteristics. The null hypothesis tested was that there i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Flavia Bittencourt Pazinatto (Author), Ranulfo Gionordoli Neto (Author), Linda Wang (Author), José Mondelli (Author), Rafael Francisco Lia Mondelli (Author), Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro (Author)
Format: Book
Published: University of São Paulo, 2012-06-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_27d9e06b8c924a81b8b9e1afd9b8c5e7
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Flavia Bittencourt Pazinatto  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Ranulfo Gionordoli Neto  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Linda Wang  |e author 
700 1 0 |a José Mondelli  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Rafael Francisco Lia Mondelli  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro  |e author 
245 0 0 |a 56-month clinical performance of Class I and II resin composite restorations 
260 |b University of São Paulo,   |c 2012-06-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 10.1590/S1678-77572012000300005 
500 |a 1678-7757 
500 |a 1678-7765 
520 |a OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the 56-month clinical performance of Class I and II resin composite restorations. Filtek P60 was compared with Filtek Z250, which are both indicated for posterior restorations but differ in terms of handling characteristics. The null hypothesis tested was that there is no difference in the clinical performance of the two resin composites in posterior teeth. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-three patients were treated by the same operator, who prepared 48 Class I and 42 Class II cavities, which were restored with Single Bond/Filtek Z250 or Single Bond/Filtek P60 restorative systems. Restorations were evaluated by two independent examiners at baseline and after 56 months, using the modified USPHS criteria. Data were analyzed statistically using Chi-square and Fisher's Exact tests (a=0.05). RESULTS: After 56 months, 25 patients (31 Class I and 36 Class II) were analyzed. A 3% failure rate occurred due to secondary caries and excessive loss of anatomic form for P60. For both restorative systems, there were no significant differences in secondary caries and postoperative sensitivity. However, significant changes were observed with respect to anatomic form, marginal discoloration, and marginal adaptation. Significant decreases in surface texture were observed exclusively for the Z250 restorations. CONCLUSIONS: Both restorative systems can be used for posterior restorations and can be expected to perform well in the oral environment. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a Clinical trial 
690 |a Composite resins 
690 |a Permanent dental restoration 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Journal of Applied Oral Science, Vol 20, Iss 3, Pp 323-328 (2012) 
787 0 |n http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1678-77572012000300005 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1678-7757 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/1678-7765 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/27d9e06b8c924a81b8b9e1afd9b8c5e7  |z Connect to this object online.