A clinical comparison of three anterior restorative resins at 3 years.
An in vivo comparison was made of three different types of restorative resins: a conventional composite resin, a chemically cured microfilled resin, and a small-particle, glass-filled, visible light-cured composite resin. Twenty-eight sets of three restorations were placed 20 patients and examined using the Ryge rating system. All resins performed well and were not significantly different from one another at 1 year. After 3 years, all materials were considered satisfactory, but the conventional composite resins had significantly more surface roughness than did the other resins. Each of the resin materials also declined in color match after 3 years.
D000180:Acrylic Resins; D000328:Adult; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D003116:Color; D003188:Composite Resins; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent; D006025:Glycosaminoglycans; D006801:Humans; D008875:Middle Aged; D013499:Surface Properties; D013997:Time Factors
D000180:Acrylic Resins; D003188:Composite Resins; D006025:Glycosaminoglycans; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; C033930:Silar (3M); C040617:mesoglycan