Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin-based composites for posterior restorations in permanent teeth: results at 12 months.
BACKGROUND
Packable resin-based composites and simplified resin bonding systems are marketed to offer many advantages over conventional posterior hybrid composites and total-etch bonding systems. The authors conducted a study to evaluate the initial clinical performances of a packable and a conventional hybrid resin-based composite used with a simplified bonding system.


METHODS
A total of 57 Class I and 45 Class II restorations were placed in the permanent teeth of 65 adult patients. The carious lesions were restored with either packable resin-based composite (SureFil, Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany) or conventional hybrid resin-based composite (SpectrumTPH, Dentsply DeTrey GmbH), using a resin adhesive (Non-Rinse Conditioner and Prime & Bond NT, both manufactured by Dentsply DeTrey GmbH). The authors evaluated the restorations using U.S. Public Health Service-Ryge modified criteria (in which Alfa is the highest rating) and by using color transparencies and die stone replicas.


RESULTS
Three SureFil restorations failed before their baseline evaluation. There were no failures among the 78 SpectrumTPH restorations evaluated at 12 months. For both resin-based composites, Alfa ratings were 90 percent or higher for marginal discoloration, anatomical form, surface texture and surface staining. Lower percentages of restorations were rated Alfa for color match, marginal integrity and gingival health. Occasional mild postoperative sensitivity was reported for four SureFil restorations and one SpectrumTPH restoration. The mean occlusal wear rate was 38 micrometers for the larger SureFil restorations and 25 microm for the smaller SpectrumTPH restorations.


CONCLUSIONS
The 12-month clinical performances of the two restorative materials were satisfactory and not significantly different for each of the parameters evaluated.


CONCLUSIONS
A packable and a conventional hybrid resin-based composite placed with a simplified bonding system in posterior permanent teeth showed satisfactory and similar results after 12 months.
Yip
Kevin H K
KH
Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, The Prince Philip Dental Hospital, Hong Kong SAR, PR China. Kevin.H.K.Yip@hkusua.hku.hk
Poon
Belinda K M
BK
Chu
Frederick C S
FC
Poon
Eric C M
EC
Kong
Fiona Y C
FY
Smales
Roger J
RJ
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D001641:Bicuspid; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D003188:Composite Resins; D001840:Dental Bonding; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D019554:Dental Restoration Wear; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D008963:Molar; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; D011336:Probability
D003188:Composite Resins; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; C425843:Prime and Bond NT; C403464:SureFil packable composite; C467914:TPH spectrum