title: Clinical performance of the posterior composite QuiXfil after 3, 6, and 18 months in Class 1 and 2 cavities.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This longitudinal randomized controlled clinical trial evaluated direct composite restorations for clinical acceptability of posterior restoratives in single- or multisurface cavities and provided a preliminary survey of the 3-, 6-, and 18-month results.
  
  
  METHODS
  Three clinicians placed 46 QuiXfil (Xeno III; Dentsply DeTrey) and 50 Tetric Ceram (Syntac Classic; Vivadent) composite restorations in stress-bearing Class 1 and 2 cavities in first or second molars (43 adult patients). Clinical evaluation was performed at baseline and after 3, 6, and 18 months by 2 other clinicians using modified US Public Health Service criteria. At the final recall period, 45 QuiXfil and 49 Tetric Ceram restorations were assessed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 97.8% of QuiXfil and 100% of Tetric Ceram posterior composites were assessed to be clinically excellent or acceptable with predominating Alpha scores. At the 18-month recall, 1 QuiXfil restoration had failed because of bulk fracture. No significant differences between either composite could be detected at 18 months for all evaluated clinical criteria (P > .05). Small QuiXfil restorations exhibited significantly less marginal discoloration (P = .003) and better restoration integrity (P = .008) than large restorations. The comparison of restoration performance with time within both groups yielded a significant increase in marginal discoloration for QuiXfil (P = .011) and significant deterioration for anatomic form at the marginal step for Tetric Ceram (P = .011). However, both changes were only effects of scoring shifts from Alpha to Bravo.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Clinical assessment of stress-bearing QuiXfil and Tetric Ceram posterior composite restorations exhibited for both materials good clinical results with predominating Alpha scores.
authors.affiliation: Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany. manhart@manhart.com
authors.forename: Juergen
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Manhart
authors.forename: Hong Yan
authors.initials: HY
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Petra
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Neuerer
authors.forename: Lidka
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Thiele
authors.forename: Birgit
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Jaensch
authors.forename: Reinhard
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Hickel
mesh_terms: D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D000328:Adult; D003188:Composite Resins; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D019554:Dental Restoration Wear; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008297:Male; D008963:Molar
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C510379:QuiXfil; C121818:Tetric ceram