Bulk-fill With Different Technique Three-year Clinical Performance

N/AUnknownNCT05861908

Mansoura University50 enrolled

Overview

The current study will be intended to evaluate and compare three-year clinical performance of class II bulk-fill resin composite restorations placed with different techniques.

Fifty patients with proximal carious lesion in permanent molars were included in the study. A total eighty class II cavities were restored with one of the following bulk-fill resin composite with their adhesive systems (n=20) Filtek™ Bulk Fill, Heated Filtek™ Bulk Fill, G-aenial™ BULK Injectable or Sonicfill3. Double blinded randomized clinical trial with survival and clinical quality were evaluated at baseline, after 12 , 24 and 36months using modified FDI(Fédération dentaire internationale) World Dental Federation criteria

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

DOUBLE

Enrollment

Conditions

Bulk-fill Which is Special Type of Resin Composite Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate

Interventions

Filtek™ Bulk Fill restorationOTHER

restoration of class II caries with different bulk-fill technique

Heated Filtek™ Bulk Fill restorationOTHER

restoration of class II caries with different bulk-fill technique

G-aenial™ BULK Injectable restorationOTHER

restoration of class II caries with different bulk-fill technique

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 YearsMax age: 35 YearsHealthy volunteers:

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * Good general health * Good oral hygienic * Patient aging 18-35 year * Patient available for follow-up visits compound class II (mesio-occlusal or disto-occlusal) * Carious lesion in the external and middle third of dentin thickness * ICDAS (International caries detection and assessment system) 4 or 5 that diagnosed clinically and radiographically. * Maxillary or mandibular first or second molars * Tooth with antagonist and adjacent mesial and distal tooth contact, * Normal response to a vitality test. Exclusion Criteria: * Poor oral hygiene * Severe or chronic periodontitis * Heavy bruxism * Occlusion fewer than 20 teeth * Sensitivity to resin-based material. * Patients with orthodontic treatment * Patients on pregnancy or lactation * chronic use of anti-inflammatory drugs, analgesic, and/or psychotropic drugs * Patient potentially unable to attend recall visits * Teeth would need direct pulp capping or * Teeth act as abutment for fixed or removable prosthesis.

Locations (1)

Operative Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University

Al Mansurah, Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Esthetic Properties of restorations

criteria that evaluated according to Modified FDI(International Dental Federation) world dental federation is: 1. Surface luster 2. Staining 3. Color match and translucency 4. Esthetic and Anatomic form Descriptive scale from 1 to 5. Note: 1 is clinically excellent 5 is clinically poor

Time frame: Three years Follow up

Functional Properties of restorations

criteria that evaluated according to Modified FDI (International Dental Federation) world dental federation is: 1. Fractures of material and retention 2. Marginal adaptation 3. Occlusal contour and wear 4. Proximal anatomical form 5. Patient's view Descriptive scale from 1 to 5. Note: 1 is clinically excellent 5 is clinically poor

Time frame: Three years Follow up

Biological Properties of restorations

criteria that evaluated according to Modified FDI (International Dental Federation) world dental federation is: 1. Post-operative (hyper-sensitivity) and tooth vitality 2. Recurrence of caries, erosion, abfraction 3. Tooth integrity (enamel cracks, tooth fractures) 4. Periodontal 5. Adjacent Mucosa 6. Oral and General Health Descriptive scale from 1 to 5. Note: 1 is clinically excellent 5 is clinically poor

Time frame: Three years Follow up

Data from ClinicalTrials.gov

This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.