Hardan Louis, Sidawi Layla, Akhundov Murad, Bourgi Rim, Ghaleb Maroun, Dabbagh Sarah, Sokolowski Krzysztof, Cuevas-Suárez Carlos Enrique, Lukomska-Szymanska Monika
Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Saint-Joseph University, Beirut 1107 2180, Lebanon.
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Saint-Joseph University, Beirut 1107 2180, Lebanon.
Polymers (Basel). 2021 Jun 4;13(11):1873. doi: 10.3390/polym13111873.
The aim of this study was to assess the one year clinical performance of a new application method, the Fast-Modelling Bulk Technique (FMBT), in comparison to the Composite-Up Layering Technique (CULT) in posterior cavities. Thirty patients with two class I cavities on permanent human molars were enrolled in the present study. A total of sixty class I cavities were prepared and randomly divided according to the restoration technique used: 30 cavities restored by incremental layering technique and modelling of the last layer with Composite-Up Technique (CUT) using the composite Filtek Z250XT (3M ESPE; St. Paul, MN, USA) and the other 30 restored by Bulk Filling technique and modelling of the last layer by Fast-Modelling Technique (FMT) using the composite Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative (3M ESPE; St. Paul, MN, USA). Restorations were evaluated for up to one year by two observers according to Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria, through clinical and radiological exams. Exact Fisher tests were used for statistical analysis. ( ≤ 0.05). From a biological perspective, at baseline, teeth restored with both techniques did not reveal any postoperative sensitivity. However, with time, FMBT showed less postoperative sensitivity and therefore more desirable results than CULT with a nonsignificant difference after one year ( > 0.05). Concerning secondary caries, fracture of the material, and marginal adaptation, no significant difference was noted between both techniques ( > 0.05). Regarding marginal staining, CULT resulted in more staining with a significant difference, as compared to FMBT ( < 0.05). Upon radiological examination, FMBT showed a good marginal fit during the first year, whereas CULT showed small empty voids from baseline with a nonsignificant difference ( = 1.00). After one year of clinical function, both techniques showed promising results. The present study indicates that the new FMBT could have a positive effect on the marginal staining of resin composite.
本研究的目的是评估一种新的应用方法——快速成型堆积技术（FMBT），与复合树脂分层堆积技术（CULT）相比，在磨牙后牙洞中的一年临床性能。本研究纳入了30例恒牙第一磨牙有两个I类洞的患者。共制备了60个I类洞，并根据所使用的修复技术随机分组：30个洞采用分层堆积技术，并用复合树脂Filtek Z250XT（3M ESPE；美国明尼苏达州圣保罗）通过复合树脂向上堆积技术（CUT）对最后一层进行成型修复；另外30个洞采用整体充填技术，并用复合树脂Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative（3M ESPE；美国明尼苏达州圣保罗）通过快速成型技术（FMT）对最后一层进行成型修复。由两名观察者根据国际牙科联合会（FDI）标准，通过临床和影像学检查对修复体进行长达一年的评估。采用精确Fisher检验进行统计分析（P≤0.05）。从生物学角度来看，在基线时，两种技术修复的牙齿均未出现任何术后敏感症状。然而，随着时间的推移，FMBT术后敏感症状较少，因此比CULT更理想，一年后差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。关于继发龋、材料断裂和边缘适应性，两种技术之间未发现显著差异（P>0.05）。关于边缘染色，与FMBT相比，CULT导致更多染色，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。经影像学检查，FMBT在第一年显示出良好的边缘贴合，而CULT从基线开始显示出小的空洞，差异无统计学意义（P = 1.00）。经过一年的临床功能观察，两种技术均显示出良好的效果。本研究表明，新的FMBT可能对树脂复合材料的边缘染色有积极影响。
