Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):449-461. doi: 10.1007/s00784-021-04019-y. Epub 2021 Jun 15.
In the context of the phase-down of amalgam, development of easily applicable, permanent restorative materials is of high clinical interest. Aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel, tooth-colored, self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative (SABF, 3M Oral Care) and a conventional bulk-fill composite (Filtek One, 3M Oral Care; FOBF) for restoring class II cavities. The null-hypothesis tested was that both materials perform similar regarding clinical performance.
In this randomized split-mouth study, 30 patients received one SABF and one FOBF restoration each. Scotchbond Universal (3M Oral Care) was used as adhesive for FOBF (self-etch mode), while SABF was applied directly without adhesive. Restorations were evaluated by two blinded examiners at baseline, 6 months and 12 months employing FDI criteria. Non-parametric statistical analyses and χ-tests (α = 0.05) were applied.
Thirty patients (60 restorations) were available for the 6- and 12-month recalls exhibiting 100% restoration survival. All restorations revealed clinically acceptable FDI scores at all time points and for all criteria. Only regarding esthetic properties, FOBF performed significantly better than SABF regarding surface lustre (A1) and color match and translucency (A3) at all time points and marginal staining (A2b) at 12 months.
The null-hypothesis could not be rejected. Both materials performed similarly regarding clinical performance within the first year of clinical service. SABF exhibited slightly inferior, but clinically fully acceptable esthetic properties as compared to FOBF.
Within the limitations of this study, the self-adhesive bulk-fill restorative showed promising results and may be recommended for clinical use.
在逐步淘汰银汞合金的背景下,开发易于应用的永久性修复材料具有重要的临床意义。本研究旨在评估一种新型、牙色、自黏附性块状充填修复材料(SABF,3M 口腔护理)和一种传统的块状充填复合材料(Filtek One,3M 口腔护理;FOBF)用于修复 II 类洞的临床性能。检验的零假设是两种材料在临床性能方面表现相似。
在这项随机分组的分口研究中,30 名患者每侧口内各接受 1 个 SABF 和 1 个 FOBF 修复体。FOBF 使用 Scotchbond Universal(3M 口腔护理)作为黏结剂(自酸蚀模式),而 SABF 则直接应用而无需黏结剂。修复体在基线、6 个月和 12 个月时由两名盲法检查者使用 FDI 标准进行评估。采用非参数统计分析和 χ 检验(α=0.05)。
30 名患者(60 个修复体)可用于 6 个月和 12 个月的随访,修复体存活率为 100%。所有修复体在所有时间点和所有标准下均表现出临床可接受的 FDI 评分。仅在美学性能方面,FOBF 在所有时间点和所有标准下在表面光泽(A1)和颜色匹配和半透明度(A3)方面的表现明显优于 SABF,而在 12 个月时在边缘染色(A2b)方面的表现也优于 SABF。
不能拒绝零假设。在临床服务的第一年,两种材料在临床性能方面表现相似。与 FOBF 相比,SABF 的美学性能略差,但仍具有临床可接受性。
在本研究的限制范围内,自黏附性块状充填修复材料显示出有前途的结果,可推荐用于临床应用。