The purpose of the 12-month clinical study was to evaluate and compare preheated, sonic-activated, and flowable composite resins used in Class V restorations.
Because of their superior aesthetics, minimal preparation needs, and capacity to adhere to tooth structure, resin composite materials are now frequently utilized in restorative dentistry. Materials with superior mechanical qualities, better handling qualities, and improved clinical performance have been developed as a result of ongoing advancements in composite technology. Viscosity-modulated composite resins have drawn a lot of interest among these developments because they seek to maximize cavity wall adaptability while preserving adequate strength and wear resistance. To enhance the therapeutic performance of composite resins, various methods have been developed to alter their viscosity. One method for improving flow and adaptability to cavity walls prior to polymerization is preheating composite resins, which momentarily lowers viscosity. Sonic-activated composite methods reduce viscosity during installation by using sonic energy, which makes cavity adaption and handling easier. Moreover, highly filled flowable composite resins have been created to increase their mechanical strength in comparison to traditional flowable composites by combining the better flow properties of flowable materials with increased filler content. Thus, the goal of this study was to assess the clinical performance of flowable composite resins that are warmed, sonic-activated, and highly filled when employed in Class V cavities.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
36
A nanohybrid composite resin preheated prior to placement to improve flowability and adaptation in Class V restorations
A sonic-activated bulk-fill nanohybrid composite (SonicFill 2®) that reduces viscosity during placement using sonic energy.
A highly filled flowable composite (G-aenial Universal Flo®) with improved mechanical properties compared to conventional flowables
Restorative Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Tanta University
Tanta, Tanta, Egypt
The primary outcome was marginal adaptation
Clinical assessment of marginal adaptation was carried out in accordance with the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria by two calibrated examiners at baseline and after 6, 9, and 12 months. The restorations were graded based on their compliance with the evaluation criteria as follows: score 1 (clinically excellent), score 2 (clinically satisfactory), score 3 (clinically acceptable), and scores 4 and 5 (clinically unsatisfactory). Clinical success was considered when restorations received scores of 1, 2, or 3, whereas scores of 4 or 5 were regarded as failures. Visual examination of the evaluated parameters was performed using a high-intensity light source, and a magnifying dental loupe was used to enhance observation. Intragroup comparisons of restoration outcomes across different follow-up intervals were analyzed using the Friedman test. Intergroup comparisons among the different restorative materials within the same follow-up period were performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. T
Time frame: 12 months
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
A standard nanohybrid composite (NanoPaq®) used according to manufacturer instructions without modification