12-months Clinical Evaluation of Fiber Reinforced Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Incremental Packing of Nanohybrid Resin Composite in Restoration of Deep Proximal Lesions of Permanent Molars: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Salem, Mennatallah; Hassanein, Olfat; ElKassas, Dina; Shaalan, Omar Osama

doi:10.15644/asc56/3/5

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to an earlier systematic review, a lower failure rate of direct restorations was observed to occur with the use of rubber dam isolation than those performed using saliva ejectors and cotton rolls as a means of attaining the required moisture control 63 . Amongst the four studies in this review where rubber dam isolation was used, the absence of any restorative failures were observed 33 , 36 , 40 , 45 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Overall, bias risk for all domains was low for two studies 32 , 33 (11.1%). Two studies 34 , 35 demonstrated high risk (11.1%); and fourteen studies 6 , 36 – 48 showed some concerns (77.8%) for overall bias risk as shown in Figs. 2 and 3 .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“… Study Type of Teeth and Restoration Groups Teeth Per Group Etching Method Adhesive System Resin Placement Technique Salem et al, 2022 36 Molar Bulk Resin + Conventional Resin 18 Ultra-Etch selective enamel etching and rinsing G-premio Bond EverX posterior + G-ænial Sculpt Two-step Bulk (Class II) Conventional Resin 18 G-ænial Sculpt Incremental Endo Hoshino et al, 2022 34 Premolar (94) and Molar (65) Bulk Resin + Conventional Resin 53 35% phosphoric acid gel (Ultra-etch) etching and rinsing Adper Single Bond 2 Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Filtek Z350XT Two-step Bulk (Class II) Bulk Resin + Conventional Resin 53 XP Bond2 SureFil SDR + TPH3 Two-step Bulk Conventional Resin 53 Peak Universal Amelogen Plus Incremental Sekundo et al, 2022 37 Premolar (56) and Molar (64) Bulk resin 60 35% phosphoric acid (Scotchbond Universal Etchant) selective enamel etching and rinsing 3M Scotchbond Universal adhesive Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Bulk (Class II) Conventional resin 60 Filtek Supreme XTE Incremental Hardan et al, 2021 6 Premolar and Molar Bulk resin 30 32% phosphoric acid gel (Scotchbond universal) etching and rinsing Two-step etch-and-rinse Adper Single Bond Filtek bulk-fill Posterior Restorative Bulk (Class I) Conventional resin 30 Filtek Z250XT Incremental ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The clinical performance of bulk-fill versus the incremental layered application of direct resin composite restorations: a systematic review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To systematically review the scientific evidence comparing the clinical effectiveness of bulk-fill versus incrementally layered conventional resin composites and to evaluate if one method offers clear merits with specific clinical outcomes. Materials and methods Using relevant mesh terms and pre-established eligibility criteria in PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science, a thorough scientific search was conducted with an end-date of 30.04.2023. Randomized controlled clinical trials that involved the direct comparison of Class I and Class II resin composite restorations applied using incremental layering techniques versus bulk-filled in permanent teeth with an observation period of at least six months were considered. To evaluate the bias risk of the finalized records, a revised version of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was implemented. Results Out of the 1445 records determined, 18 eligible reports were chosen for qualitative analysis. Data obtained was categorized as per, the cavity design, the intervention, the comparator(s), the methods of success/failure assessment, the outcomes, and follow-up. Two studies demonstrated an overall low-risk of bias, fourteen studies raised some concerns, and two studies exhibited high-risk. Conclusion Bulk filled resin composite restorations demonstrated clinical outcomes similar to those of incrementally layered resin composite restorations within a review interval of 6 months to 10 years.

show abstract