Evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations: three-year results of a randomized, double-blind and controlled clinical trial.
The clinical performance of packable and conventional hybrid resin composites in Class I restorations for a period of three years was compared using a randomized controlled double-blind clinical trial with self-matching design. A total of 50 pairs of Class I restorations were placed in 32 adult patients by one dentist in a self-matching prospective clinical trial. The paired teeth were divided into the TPH Spectrum/XenoIII (TS) restoration group and the Synergy Compact/One Coat (SC) restoration group according to a random number table. Application of the materials followed the manufacturer's instructions. The restorations were evaluated by two independent evaluators using US Public Health Service (USPHS)-Ryge modified criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using the McNemar's test with Yates' continuity correction. After three years, 40 pairs of restorations were available for evaluation. Four TS and two SC restorations failed due to fracture. Only one TS-restored tooth showed postoperative sensitivity at baseline and the symptom disappeared one week later. Alpha ratings of TS vs SC restorations were as follows: 95% vs 98% for color match, 85% vs 88% for marginal integrity, 88% vs 90% for anatomical form, 85% vs 83% for marginal discoloration, 88% vs 93% for occlusal contact. For both materials, Alpha ratings were 88% for surface texture. The three-year clinical performances of the two restorative materials were satisfactory and not significantly different for each of the parameters evaluated.
Shi
Lu
L
Key Lab for Oral Biomedical Engineering Ministry of Education, Department of Cariology & Endodontics, School & Hospital of Stomatology, Wuhan University, Wuhan, PR China.
Wang
Xuefei
X
Zhao
Qinwen
Q
Zhang
Yan
Y
Zhang
Lu
L
Ren
Yanfang
Y
Chen
Zhi
Z
D000328:Adult; D002126:Calcium Hydroxide / Q000737:chemistry; D003116:Color; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D003736:Dental Cavity Lining; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation / Q000145:classification; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000145:classification*; D003807:Dentin Sensitivity / Q000209:etiology; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements / Q000737:chemistry; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008422:Materials Testing; D008689:Methacrylates / Q000737:chemistry; D011446:Prospective Studies; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry; D013499:Surface Properties; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D008689:Methacrylates; C426984:One Coat Bond; D019279:Resin Cements; C467914:TPH spectrum; C487957:Xeno III; C485972:synergy compact resin cement; D002126:Calcium Hydroxide