Clinical efficacy of novel self-adhesive flowable composite resin restoration: in vivo study

<p><strong>Objective:</strong> This study was carried out to evaluate the clinical performance of the conventional flowable composite resin restoration, using one- step adhesive system versus the novel self-adhesive flowable composite restoration.</p><p><strong>Me...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Ghada A Elbaz (Verfasst von), Ola M Fahmy (Verfasst von), Mohamed Sherif M (Verfasst von), Farag (Verfasst von), Yousra S Helmy (Verfasst von)
Format: Buch
Veröffentlicht: International Journal of Oral and Craniofacial Science - Peertechz Publications, 2017-12-14.
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:<p><strong>Objective:</strong> This study was carried out to evaluate the clinical performance of the conventional flowable composite resin restoration, using one- step adhesive system versus the novel self-adhesive flowable composite restoration.</p><p><strong>Method:</strong> Twenty patients received forty class I restorations in primary carious molars using split mouth design. Clinical performance was evaluated using US Public Health Service modified Ryge criteria. Restorations of both materials were evaluated for: anatomic form, marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, surface texture and recurrent caries after 1 week, 3, 6, 9 months and after 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results:</strong> Concerning the anatomic form, the marginal integrity and marginal discoloration, there was no statistical difference between both materials till 9 ms but at 12 ms, there was a significant difference in favor of the self-adhering flowable composite. As for the secondary caries till 6 ms, both materials scored 100% score 1, while, at 9 and 12 ms, there was no significant difference between both materials. The surface texture of both restorative materials scored (score1). Tracing both materials by time, there was a statistically significant difference in both materials in the anatomic form, marginal integrity and marginal discoloration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> self-adhesive flowable composite showed improved clinical performance at 12 months than to conventional flowable composite.</p>
DOI:10.17352/2455-4634.000033