This study compared the clinical performance of a nanofilled resin composite for posterior restorations with 2 microhybrid and 1 packable composite after 12 months of clinical service. Forty-two patients with at least 5 Class I or II restorations under occlusion were enrolled in this study. A total of 148 restorations were placed, 25% for each material (Filtek Supreme, Pyramid, Esthet-X or Tetric Ceram). Two calibrated operators placed all restorations, according to the manufacturers' instructions. One week later, the restorations were finished/polished. Two independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline and after 12 months according to the USPHS modified criteria. All patients attended the 12-month recall and 148 restorations were evaluated. Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank and Wilcoxon sign-ranked test for pair-wise comparison was used for data analysis (α=0.05). All materials showed only minor modifications, and no differences were detected between their performance at baseline and after 12 months. After 1 year, the nanofilled resin composite showed similar performance to the other packable and microhybrid resin composites. ©Operative Dentistry, 2006.
CITATION STYLE
Dresch, W., Volpato, S., Gomes, J. C., Ribeiro, N. R., Reis, A., & Loguercio, A. D. (2006). Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled composite in posterior teeth: 12-month results. Operative Dentistry, 31(4), 409–417. https://doi.org/10.2341/05-103
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.