Clinical evaluation of stress-reducing direct composite restorations in structurally compromised molars: A 2-year report

13Citations
Citations of this article
105Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the clinical performance of class II large-size direct composite restorations. Materials and Methods: Fifty (50) patients 18 years or older were included in this clinical trial restoring 75 vital molar teeth with largesize cavities. Inclusion Criteria: Occlusal extension greater than two-thirds the intercuspal distance and proximal extension greater than half the distance between line angles. Teeth with residual cavity walls less than 1 mm and with one or more cusps involved were excluded. Teeth were randomly divided in three groups. Group 1: Opti-Bond FL; group 2: Scotchbond 1 XT; group 3: PQ1. Total-etching was performed using 35% phosphoric acid followed by the application of 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in the three groups. All teeth were restored using Vit-l-escence microhybrid composite resin. The proximal surface was built up first, followed by dentin and enamel occlusal surface stratification; wedge-shaped increments of composite resin were placed and cured using the Ultra-Lume V curing light through a combination of pulse and progressive curing techniques. Results: Restorations were evaluated at sixmonth intervals during the two-year period using a modified US Public Health Service criteria by two independent evaluators precalibrated at 85% reliability. No failures were reported and α scores were recorded for all parameters. Statistical analysis was performed using a χ2 test and the Fisher exact test (χ2=10.6; p=0.001). No teeth exhibited sensitivity in the three groups both at the two-week recall and two-year follow-up. © Operative Dentistry, 2012.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Deliperi, S., Bardwell, D. N., & Alleman, D. (2012). Clinical evaluation of stress-reducing direct composite restorations in structurally compromised molars: A 2-year report. Operative Dentistry, 37(2), 109–116. https://doi.org/10.2341/10-299-C

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