Dresch Walmor, Volpato Sayonara, Gomes João Carlos, Ribeiro Neila Rosane, Reis Alessandra, Loguercio Alessandro D
School of Dentistry, Department of Dental Materials and Operative Dentistry, University of Oeste de Santa Catarina, Campus Joaçaba/SC, Brazil.
Oper Dent. 2006 Jul-Aug;31(4):409-17. doi: 10.2341/05-103.
This study compared the clinical performance of a nanofilled resin composite for posterior restorations with 2 microhybrid and 1 packable composite after 12 months of clinical service. Forty-two patients with at least 5 Class I or II restorations under occlusion were enrolled in this study. A total of 148 restorations were placed, 25% for each material (Filtek Supreme, Pyramid, Esthet-X or Tetric Ceram). Two calibrated operators placed all restorations, according to the manufacturers' instructions. One week later, the restorations were finished/polished. Two independent examiners evaluated the restorations at baseline and after 12 months according to the USPHS modified criteria. All patients attended the 12-month recall and 148 restorations were evaluated. Friedman repeated measures analysis of variance by rank and Wilcoxon sign-ranked test for pair-wise comparison was used for data analysis (alpha=0.05). All materials showed only minor modifications, and no differences were detected between their performance at baseline and after 12 months. After 1 year, the nanofilled resin composite showed similar performance to the other packable and microhybrid resin composites.
本研究比较了一种用于后牙修复的纳米填充树脂复合材料与2种微混合树脂复合材料和1种可压实复合材料在临床使用12个月后的临床性能。42例至少有5个处于咬合状态的I类或II类修复体的患者参与了本研究。共放置了148个修复体，每种材料各占25%（Filtek Supreme、Pyramid、Esthet-X或Tetric Ceram）。两名经过校准的操作人员按照制造商的说明放置所有修复体。一周后，对修复体进行修整/抛光。两名独立的检查人员根据美国公共卫生署修改后的标准在基线和12个月后对修复体进行评估。所有患者均参加了12个月的复查，共评估了148个修复体。数据分析采用Friedman秩和重复测量方差分析以及用于两两比较的Wilcoxon符号秩检验（α=0.05）。所有材料仅显示出微小变化，在基线和12个月后的性能之间未检测到差异。1年后，纳米填充树脂复合材料的性能与其他可压实和微混合树脂复合材料相似。
