Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials in Class 1 Post-Endodontic Restorations in Molars—A Randomized Clinical Study

8Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate and compare two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class I post-endodontic restoration in molars. A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 25 for each group); group A: everX Posterior (packable composite) with a top layer of solareX (nano-hybrid composite) and group B: everX Flow (flowable composite) with a top layer of G-aenial universal injectable (flowable composite). Patients were evaluated immediately after the procedure (baseline), at 6 months, and at 1 year time intervals based on the modified USPHS criteria. The statistical analysis using a chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of group A and group B. Clinical performance of the combination of everX Flow with overlying G-aenial universal injectable composite proved to be comparable with everX Posterior with overlying solareX composite as post-endodontic restorations in class I lesions in permanent molars.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ranka, S., Rao, A. S., Shah, U., Solanki, D., Pawar, A. M., Reda, R., … Testarelli, L. (2022). Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials in Class 1 Post-Endodontic Restorations in Molars—A Randomized Clinical Study. Materials, 15(21). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15217858

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free