Department of Endodontics, Beijing Stomatological Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
School of Biomedical Engineering, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Oct;25(10):5955-5965. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-03901-z. Epub 2021 Apr 2.
This prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial assessed the 3-year clinical performance of a highly filled flowable composite and a conventional paste-type composite in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs).
A total of 84 NCCLs in 27 subjects were included in this split-mouth design study and randomly divided into two groups: a highly filled flowable composite Clearfil Majesty ES Flow group (ES, n = 42) and a conventional paste-type composite Majesty group (MJ, n = 42). Clearfil SE Bond was used following the manufacturer's instructions. The restorations were evaluated at baseline (BL) and 1, 2, and 3 years using FDI (World Dental Federation) criteria. Data were analysed by a paired chi-squared test for intergroup comparisons and the Friedman test for intragroup comparisons (α = 0.05).
Both groups had a 97.3% retention rate at the 3-year evaluation. The acceptable scores (FDI scores 1-3) for each criterion exhibited no significant difference between the MJ and ES groups at any time point (p = 1.00). The marginal adaptation performance of ES was significantly better than that of MJ at every evaluation point (p < 0.05).
The 3-year clinical performance of ES in NCCLs was similar to that of MJ. When the restorations were clinically acceptable, ES showed better marginal adaptation than MJ.
Compared with conventional paste-type composites, highly filled flowable composites showed similar clinical performance and better marginal adaptation for restoring NCCLs after 3 years.
TRN: ChiCTR1900028484 . Date of registration: December 22, 2019, retrospectively registered.
本前瞻性、随机、分口临床研究评估了一种高填充型流动复合树脂和一种传统糊剂型复合树脂在非龋性颈壁缺损（NCCLs）中的 3 年临床性能。
本分口设计研究共纳入 27 名受试者的 84 个 NCCLs，并随机分为两组：高填充型流动复合树脂 Clearfil Majesty ES Flow 组（ES 组，n = 42）和传统糊剂型复合树脂 Majesty 组（MJ 组，n = 42）。按照制造商的说明使用 Clearfil SE Bond。采用世界牙科联合会（FDI）标准，在基线（BL）、1 年、2 年和 3 年时对修复体进行评估。采用配对卡方检验进行组间比较，采用 Friedman 检验进行组内比较（α = 0.05）。
两组在 3 年评估时保留率均为 97.3%。每个标准的可接受评分（FDI 评分 1-3）在任何时间点，MJ 组和 ES 组之间均无显著差异（p = 1.00）。ES 的边缘适合性性能在每个评估点均显著优于 MJ（p < 0.05）。
ES 在 NCCLs 中的 3 年临床性能与 MJ 相似。当修复体在临床可接受时，ES 显示出比 MJ 更好的边缘适应性。
与传统糊剂型复合材料相比，高填充型流动复合树脂在 3 年后修复 NCCLs 时具有相似的临床性能和更好的边缘适应性。
TRN：ChiCTR1900028484。注册日期：2019 年 12 月 22 日，回溯注册。
