Clinically controlled study on the quality of class III, IV and V composite restorations after two years.
OBJECTIVE
The quality of fillings consisting of a hybrid composite was compared with fillings consisting of two different microfilled composites in a clinical examination.


METHODS
Within the design of a clinically controlled two-year study conducted under practice-relevant conditions, the composites C-Fill MH (Megadenta), Helio Progress (Vivadent), and Visio-Dispers (ESPE) were examined in anterior-tooth cavities in 134 patients by means of the split-mouth technique. The clinical examinations were performed based on modified Ryge criteria (marginal integrity, anatomical form, secondary caries, color, marginal discoloration, surface roughness) after 12 and 24 months.


RESULTS
Immediately following filling application, all evaluation criteria except color were assessed as level A. After 12 and 24 months, C-Fill MH was found to be significantly superior to the other materials with regard to marginal integrity, color, and marginal discoloration.


CONCLUSIONS
The hybrid composite C-Fill MH seems to be superior to the microfilled composites and should therefore be preferred as a restorative filling material.
Geitel
Birgit
B
Department of Operative and Preventive Dentistry and Endodontics, Humboldt University Berlin (Charité), Germany. birgit.geitel@charite.de
Kwiatkowski
Ralf
R
Zimmer
Stefan
S
Barthel
Claudia R
CR
Roulet
Jean-François
JF
Jahn
Klaus-Roland
KR
D000328:Adult; D003116:Color; D003188:Composite Resins; D003736:Dental Cavity Lining; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008297:Male; D019279:Resin Cements; D016896:Treatment Outcome
C495853:C-Fill MH; D003188:Composite Resins; D019279:Resin Cements; C072653:Helio Progress; C044373:visiodispers