Suneelkumar Chinni, Harshala Puttaganti, Madhusudhana Koppolu, Lavanya Anumula, Subha Anirudhan, Swapna Sannapureddy
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Narayana Dental College and Hospital, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Private Practitioner, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Restor Dent Endod. 2021 Apr 16;46(2):e24. doi: 10.5395/rde.2021.46.e24. eCollection 2021 May.
The present study aimed to evaluate the survival rate and clinical performance of class 1 composite restorations restored with the Filtek Bulk Fill composite material using either the bulk fill technique or the incremental technique at baseline (1 week) and at 3, 6 and 12 months of follow-up.
Forty-two patients with at least 2 carious teeth were selected. Following randomization, one tooth was restored with the Filtek Bulk Fill composite using the incremental fill technique, and the other tooth was restored with the same material using the bulk fill technique. Patients were recalled for follow-up at baseline (1 week) and 3, 6, and 12 months and evaluated using the FDI criteria.
The data were analyzed using the McNemar χ test. No statistically significant differences were found between the scores of teeth restored with either technique. At baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up; there were no significant difference in the clinical status of both groups of restorations.
Within the limitations of this study, using the bulk fill technique for restorations with the Filtek Bulk Fill material seems to be equally efficient to using the incremental fill technique.
Clinical Trials Registry-India Identifier: CTRI/2017/07/008961.
本研究旨在评估使用Filtek Bulk Fill复合树脂材料，采用一次性填充技术或分层填充技术修复的I类复合树脂修复体在基线期（1周）以及随访3、6和12个月时的生存率和临床性能。
选取42例至少有2颗龋坏牙的患者。随机分组后，一颗牙采用分层填充技术用Filtek Bulk Fill复合树脂修复，另一颗牙采用一次性填充技术用相同材料修复。在基线期（1周）以及3、6和12个月时对患者进行随访，并使用FDI标准进行评估。
采用McNemar χ检验对数据进行分析。两种修复技术修复的牙齿评分之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。在基线期以及随访3、6和12个月时，两组修复体的临床状况均无显著差异。
在本研究的局限性范围内，使用Filtek Bulk Fill材料采用一次性填充技术进行修复似乎与分层填充技术同样有效。
印度临床试验注册中心标识符：CTRI/2017/07/008961。
