Four-year clinical evaluation of Class II nano-hybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive

TY - JOUR

T1 - Four-year clinical evaluation of Class II nano-hybrid resin composite restorations bonded with a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive

AU - van Dijken, Jan W V

AU - Pallesen, Ulla

N1 - Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Objective: The objective of this prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the 4-year clinical performance of an ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite (Ceram X; Dentsply/DeTrey) in Class II restorations placed with a one-step self-etch (Xeno III; Dentsply/DeTrey) and two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Ivoclar Vivadent). Methods: Seventy-eight participants received at random at least two, as similar as possible, Class II restorations of the nano-hybrid resin composite bonded with either a single step self-etch adhesive or a control 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. The 165 restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline and then yearly during 4 years. Results: 162 restorations were evaluated at 4 years. Postoperative sensitivity was observed in 6 patients (3 Xeno III, 3 Exite) between 1 and 3 weeks. Eleven failed restorations (6.8%) were observed during the follow up. Seven in the one-step self-etch adhesive group (7.7%) and four in the 2-step etch-and-rinse group (5.6%). This resulted in non-significant different annual failure rates of 1.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Fracture of restoration was the main reason for failure. Conclusion: The ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite showed a good clinical performance in Class II cavities during the 4 year evaluation. No significant difference was seen in overall clinical effectiveness between the two adhesives.

AB - Objective: The objective of this prospective clinical trial was to evaluate the 4-year clinical performance of an ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite (Ceram X; Dentsply/DeTrey) in Class II restorations placed with a one-step self-etch (Xeno III; Dentsply/DeTrey) and two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Ivoclar Vivadent). Methods: Seventy-eight participants received at random at least two, as similar as possible, Class II restorations of the nano-hybrid resin composite bonded with either a single step self-etch adhesive or a control 2-step etch-and-rinse adhesive. The 165 restorations were evaluated using slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline and then yearly during 4 years. Results: 162 restorations were evaluated at 4 years. Postoperative sensitivity was observed in 6 patients (3 Xeno III, 3 Exite) between 1 and 3 weeks. Eleven failed restorations (6.8%) were observed during the follow up. Seven in the one-step self-etch adhesive group (7.7%) and four in the 2-step etch-and-rinse group (5.6%). This resulted in non-significant different annual failure rates of 1.9% and 1.4%, respectively. Fracture of restoration was the main reason for failure. Conclusion: The ormocer-based nano-hybrid resin composite showed a good clinical performance in Class II cavities during the 4 year evaluation. No significant difference was seen in overall clinical effectiveness between the two adhesives.

KW - Acid Etching, Dental

KW - Adult

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Ceramics

KW - Color

KW - Composite Resins

KW - Dental Bonding

KW - Dental Caries

KW - Dental Marginal Adaptation

KW - Dental Restoration Failure

KW - Dental Restoration, Permanent

KW - Dentin Sensitivity

KW - Dentin-Bonding Agents

KW - Female

KW - Follow-Up Studies

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Nanocomposites

KW - Prospective Studies

KW - Recurrence

KW - Resin Cements

KW - Silanes

KW - Surface Properties

KW - Treatment Outcome

U2 - 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.09.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jdent.2010.09.006

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 20933047

SN - 1687-8728

VL - 39

SP - 16

EP - 25

JO - International Journal of Dentistry

JF - International Journal of Dentistry

IS - 1

ER -