HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 134, No 12, 1581-1589. © 2003 American Dental Association

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by YIP, K. H.-K. Articles by SMALES, R. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by YIP, K. H.-K. Articles by SMALES, R. J. Related Collections Restoratives

COVER STORY
JADA Continuing Education

Results at 12 months

Background. Packable resin-based composites and simplified resin bonding systems are marketed to offer many advantages over conventional posterior hybrid composites and total-etch bonding systems. The authors conducted a study to evaluate the initial clinical performances of a packable and a conventional hybrid resin-based composite used with a simplified bonding system.

Methods. A total of 57 Class I and 45 Class II restorations were placed in the permanent teeth of 65 adult patients. The carious lesions were restored with either packable resin-based composite (SureFil, Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany) or conventional hybrid resin-based composite (Spectrum^TPH, Dentsply DeTrey GmbH), using a resin adhesive (Non-Rinse Conditioner and Prime & Bond NT, both manufactured by Dentsply DeTrey GmbH). The authors evaluated the restorations using U.S. Public Health Service-Ryge modified criteria (in which Alfa is the highest rating) and by using color transparencies and die stone replicas.

Results. Three SureFil restorations failed before their baseline evaluation. There were no failures among the 78 Spectrum^TPH restorations evaluated at 12 months. For both resin-based composites, Alfa ratings were 90 percent or higher for marginal discoloration, anatomical form, surface texture and surface staining. Lower percentages of restorations were rated Alfa for color match, marginal integrity and gingival health. Occasional mild postoperative sensitivity was reported for four SureFil restorations and one Spectrum^TPH restoration. The mean occlusal wear rate was 38 micrometers for the larger SureFil restorations and 25 µm for the smaller Spectrum^TPH restorations.

Conclusions. The 12-month clinical performances of the two restorative materials were satisfactory and not significantly different for each of the parameters evaluated.

Clinical Implications. A packable and a conventional hybrid resin-based composite placed with a simplified bonding system in posterior permanent teeth showed satisfactory and similar results after 12 months.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. C. Sarrett, C. N. Brooks, and J. T. Rose Clinical performance evaluation of a packable posterior composite in bulk-cured restorations J Am Dent Assoc, January 1, 2006; 137(1): 71 - 80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. C.M. POON, R. J. SMALES, and K. H.-K. YIP Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: Results at 3.5 years J Am Dent Assoc, November 1, 2005; 136(11): 1533 - 1540. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]