Clinical Comparison of Convetional Bulk-Fill Composite Resins and Thermoviscous Bulk-Fill Composite Resins in Class II Restorations
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Class II Dental Caries
- Sponsor
- Hacettepe University
- Enrollment
- 54
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Postoperative sensitivity
- Status
- Active, not recruiting
- Last Updated
- 5 months ago
Overview
Brief Summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to evaluate the clinical performance of Class II restorations of a thermoviscous nanohybrid materials , of a bulk-fill composite resin, and of conventional nanohyribrid bulk-fill composite resins .
Class II restorations will be performed in patients using three different restorative materials.And restorations will be evaluated using modified US Public Health Service criteria Resorations will be photograped and restorations will be evaluated for 6,12 months.
Detailed Description
The aim of this clinical study was to evaluate the clinical performance of Class II restorations of a thermoviscous nanohybrid materials , of a bulk-fill composite resin, and of conventional nanohyribrid bulk-fill composite resins. Methods and Materials: Class II restorations will be performed in patients using three different restorative materials: VisCalor Thermoviscous Bulk-Fill (VCB; a thermoviscous nanohybrid bulk-fill composite resin) , Admira Fusion x-tra ( AFT: a conventional nanohybrid bulk-fill composite resin) and 3M Filtek One Bulk-Fill Restprative (FOB: a conventional bulk-fill nanocomposite ) Futura Bond U adhesive will be used for both conventional bulk-fill composite resin restorations and thermoviscous bulk-fill composite resin restorations. Criteria for inclusion of patients in the study : Healthy individuals without any systemic disease, patients who is between 18 and 60 years old, patiens who brush their teeth 2 times a day,voluntary individuals who have agreed to participate in the study and signed the illuminated consent form, who have been given initial periodontal treatment. Criteria for not inclusion of volunteers in research:Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding ,patienrs with advanced periodontial disease,patiens using a moving segmental prosthesis,patiens who have maloclusions,patiens who have bruxism,patients with known allergies to resin-based restorative materials and binding agents The restorations will be evaluated using modified US Public Health Service criteria in terms of retention, color match, marginal discoloration, anatomic form, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, and surface texture. Resorations will be photograped and restorations will be evaluated for 6,12 months .
Investigators
Meriç Tuncer
principle investigator
Hacettepe University
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Healthy individuals without any systemic disease
- •Patients who is between 18 and 60 years old,
- •Patiens who brush their teeth 2 times a day
- •Voluntary individuals who have agreed to participate in the study and signed the illuminated consent form, who have been given initial periodontal treatment.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding
- •Patients with advanced periodontial disease
- •Patiens using a moving segmental prosthesis
- •Patiens who have maloclusions,
- •Patiens who have bruxism,
- •Patients with known allergies to resin-based restorative materials and binding agents
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Postoperative sensitivity
Time Frame: From baseline to 18 month
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate. Retention rate was evaluated by an independent clinician. Scores: Alfa: Not present. Bravo: sensitive but diminishing in intensity. . Charlie:constant sensitivity, not diminishing in intensity
Marginal Staining
Time Frame: From baseline to 18 month
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal staining. Marginal staining was evaluated by an independent clinician. Visual inspection with a mirror was performed . Scores: Alfa: No discoloration. Bravo: Discoloration without. Charlie: Discoloration with penetration in pulpal direction
Retention
Time Frame: From baseline to 18 month
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate. Retention rate was evaluated by an independent clinician. Scores: Alfa: No loss of restorative material. Charlie: Any loss of restorative material
Marginal Adaptation
Time Frame: From baseline to 18 month
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding marginal adaptation. Marginal adaptation was evaluated by an independent clinician. Visual inspection with a mirror was performed . Scores; Alfa: Closely adapted, no visible crevice. Bravo: Visible crevice, explorer will penetrate. Charlie: Crevice in which dentin is exposed
Seconder caries
Time Frame: From baseline to 18 month
Observers evaluated the restorations was performed using the modified United State Public Health Service criteria regarding retention rate. Retention rate was evaluated by an independent clinician. Scores: Alfa: No caries present. Charlie: Caries present