Performance of self-adhering flowable composite in Class V restorations: 18 months clinical study

Aim: The present randomized clinical study compared the 18 months performance of self-adhering flowable composite with a conventional flowable composite in anterior Class V restorations. Materials and methods: Totally, 20 patients, each with two moderate cervical carious lesions, participated in thi...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Al Harbi, F.A (Author), AlHumaid, J. (Author), ElEmbaby, A.E (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 03689nam a2200589Ia 4500
001 10.5005-jp-journals-10024-2337
008 220706s2018 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 15263711 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Performance of self-adhering flowable composite in Class V restorations: 18 months clinical study 
260 0 |b Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd  |c 2018 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2337 
520 3 |a Aim: The present randomized clinical study compared the 18 months performance of self-adhering flowable composite with a conventional flowable composite in anterior Class V restorations. Materials and methods: Totally, 20 patients, each with two moderate cervical carious lesions, participated in this singlecenter study. Forty restorations were allocated on a random basis by one examiner not involved in the restoration or the evaluation procedures, In each patient, one lesion was allocated to be restored using self-adhering flowable composite [Fusio liquid dentin (FL)] and the other to be restored using conventional flowable composite [Tetric Flow (FF)]. The allocation sequence of the restorations was concealed from the operator in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed, and stapled envelopes. An operator restored all the preparations in accordance to the manufacturer's instructions. Finishing and polishing of the restorations were done immediately after placement. Evaluation of the restorations was done in accordance to the United States Public Health Services (USPHS), modified Ryge criteria. Statistical analysis was completed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 (IBM Product, Chicago, USA). Results: One case could not be reassessed at 18 months follow-up in both groups. No significant differences were detected between the tested materials from baseline to those of 18 months using the modified USPHS criteria. Conclusion: Self-adhering flowable composite exhibited acceptable clinical performance comparable with the conventional flowable composite in anterior Class V restorations over an 18-month period. Nevertheless, the findings of this study must be validated by a longer clinical study. Clinical significance: Self-adhering flowable composite exhibited clinical performance comparable with the conventional flowable composite in Class V restoration. © 2018 Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd. 
650 0 4 |a adult 
650 0 4 |a article 
650 0 4 |a Class V 
650 0 4 |a clinical article 
650 0 4 |a Clinical performance 
650 0 4 |a comparative study 
650 0 4 |a Composite Resins 
650 0 4 |a controlled study 
650 0 4 |a dental caries 
650 0 4 |a Dental Caries 
650 0 4 |a dental material 
650 0 4 |a Dental Materials 
650 0 4 |a dental restoration 
650 0 4 |a Dental Restoration, Permanent 
650 0 4 |a dentin 
650 0 4 |a female 
650 0 4 |a Flowable composite 
650 0 4 |a flowable hybrid composite 
650 0 4 |a follow up 
650 0 4 |a Follow-Up Studies 
650 0 4 |a fusio 
650 0 4 |a human 
650 0 4 |a Humans 
650 0 4 |a Illinois 
650 0 4 |a procedures 
650 0 4 |a public health service 
650 0 4 |a randomized controlled trial 
650 0 4 |a resin 
650 0 4 |a resin cement 
650 0 4 |a Resin Cements 
650 0 4 |a Self-adhering composite 
650 0 4 |a sociology 
650 0 4 |a statistical analysis 
650 0 4 |a tetric flow composite resin 
650 0 4 |a time factor 
650 0 4 |a Time Factors 
700 1 |a Al Harbi, F.A.  |e author 
700 1 |a AlHumaid, J.  |e author 
700 1 |a ElEmbaby, A.E.  |e author 
773 |t Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice