Two Years Clinical Evaluation of a Bulk Fill Composite Resin Compared With a Nanohybride Incremental Fill Composite Resin in Class Ιι Cavities

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine the two years clinical performance of a bulk fill composite and conventional nanohybride incremental fill composite in class II cavities. Materials and methods:A total of 60 class Π cavities were restored with either bulk fill material (Tetric EvoCeram bulk fill) and self-etch adhesive (AdheSE adhesive) or an incremental resin composite (Tetric N-Ceram Nano-hybrid) and self-etch adhesive (AdheSE adhesive). In group Ι: The restorative material Tetric EvoCeram Bulk-Fill was applied in one bulk. In group Π: Tetric N-Ceram Nano-hybrid was applied using an incremental filling technique starting at the gingival wall. All restorations were clinically evaluated at periods of 1 week (initial recall), after six months, after one year, after eighteen months and at the end of two years. Assessment was done according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Data were statistically analyzed using Friedman test and Fisher's exact at P<0.05 level of significance. Results:There was no significant difference between group Ι and group Π regarding all tested criteria at different follow up periods; where P > 0.05. Conclusion:Bulk fill composite (Tetric EvoCeram bulk fill) and incremental fill composite resin (Tetric N-Ceram Nano-hybrid) exhibited comparable acceptable clinical performance after two years of evaluation.

Clinical Performance of CAD /CAM Fixed Functional Space Maintainer Made of Poly Ether Ether Ketone (PEEK)

“…The modified USPHS criteria, an established method used in clinical investigation was selected in the current study to evaluate the space maintainers. The modified USPHS criteria are considered the most commonly used system for evaluating the most important criteria of direct restorations [15,16] .…”