title: In vitro and clinical outcome of sandwich restorations with a bulk-fill flowable composite liner for pulpotomized primary teeth.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The present study determined whether primary molar pulpotomies showed equal in vitro and clinical success when restored with sandwich restoration with a bulk-fill flowable composite (BFRBC) liner versus a stainless steel crown (SSC) restoration.
  
  
  METHODS
  Sixty extracted human primary second molars with proximo-occlusal cavities were selected for in vitro test. The specimens were randomly divided into three groups (n = 20) and restored with sandwich restoration with a BFRBC liner composite (RBC) restoration and SSC. In addition, sixty teeth were selected from 20 children and each child had at least three primary molars (first and/or second primary molar) requiring pulpotomy. The patients were recalled for clinical and radiographic evaluation at approximately 6- and 12-month intervals.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The SSC restoration had significantly higher microleakage than the others. Although there was a significant difference between the RBC and the SSC (P = 0.02), the differences between the BFRBC and the RBC, as well as between the BFRBC and the SSC, were not statistically significant at the 12-month radiographic evaluation (P = 0.33 and P = 0.11, respectively).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In laboratory conditions, sandwich restoration with BFRBC liner showed a superior seal margins of pulpotomized primary molars. Based clinical and radiographical evaluation, teeth treated with formocresol pulpotomy and restored with sandwich restoration with BFRBC liner were as successful as those restored with a SSC.
authors.affiliation: Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey.  k_cantekin@hotmail.com
authors.forename: Kenan
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Cantekin
authors.forename: Husnuye
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Gumus
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D004396:Coloring Agents; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D003442:Crowns; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003731:Dental Caries / Q000628:therapy; D003736:Dental Cavity Lining / Q000379:methods*; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000145:classification; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements / Q000737:chemistry; D006801:Humans; D066298:In Vitro Techniques; D008297:Male; D008422:Materials Testing; D008963:Molar / Q000473:pathology; D010483:Periapical Diseases / Q000209:etiology; D011672:Pulpotomy / Q000379:methods*; D019252:Radiography, Dental, Digital; D013193:Stainless Steel / Q000737:chemistry; D014094:Tooth, Deciduous / Q000473:pathology*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D015035:Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement / Q000737:chemistry
chemical_list: C485363:Aelite LS; D004396:Coloring Agents; D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D015035:Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement; C111840:flowable hybrid composite; D013193:Stainless Steel