umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A six-year prospective randomized study of a nano-hybrid and a conventional hybrid resin composite in Class II restorations
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Odontology.
2013 (English)In: Dental Materials, ISSN 0109-5641, E-ISSN 1879-0097, Vol. 29, no 2, 191-198 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: The objective of this 6 year prospective randomized equivalence trial was to evaluate the long-term clinical performance of a new nano-hybrid resin composite (RC) in Class II restorations in an intraindividual comparison with its well-established conventional hybrid RC predecessor. Methods: Each of 52 participants received at least two, as similar as possible, Class II restorations. The cavities were chosen at random to be restored with an experimental nano-hybrid RC (Exite/Tetric EvoCeram (TEC); n = 61) and a conventional hybrid RC (Exite/Tetric Ceram (TC); n = 61). The restorations were evaluated with slightly modified USPHS criteria at baseline and then annually during 6 years. Results: Two patient drop outs with 4 restorations (2TEC, 2TC) were registered during the follow-up. A prediction of the caries risk showed that 16 of the evaluated 52 patients were considered as high risk patients. Eight TEC (2 P, 6M) and 6 TC (2P, 4M) restorations failed during the 6 years. The main reason of failure was secondary caries (43%; including the failure fracture + secondary caries it increases to 57.1%). 63% of the recurrent caries lesions were found in high caries risk participants. The overall success rate at six years was 88.1%. No statistical significant difference was found in the overall survival rate between the two investigated RC.Significance: The nano-hybrid RC showed good clinical performance during the 6 year evaluation, comparable to the well-established conventional hybrid RC.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2013. Vol. 29, no 2, 191-198 p.
Keyword [en]
Dental restorations, Clinical, Composite resin, Nanofiller, Resin composite, Posterior
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-60851DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.08.013PubMedID: 23063254OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-60851DiVA: diva2:563734
Available from: 2012-10-31 Created: 2012-10-31 Last updated: 2017-12-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
van Dijken, Jan W V
By organisation
Department of Odontology
In the same journal
Dental Materials
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 84 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf