Badr Carelle, Spagnuolo Gianrico, Amenta Francesco, Khairallah Carlos, Mahdi Syed Sarosh, Daher Elie, Battineni Gopi, Baba Nadim Z, Zogheib Tatiana, Qasim Syed Saad B, Daher Tony, Chintalapudi Nalini, Zogheib Carina Mehanna
Department of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Saint Joseph University of Beirut, Beirut 1004 2020, Lebanon.
Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatological Sciences, University of Naples "Federico II", 80131 Napoli, Italy.
J Funct Biomater. 2021 Sep 9;12(3):51. doi: 10.3390/jfb12030051.
This prospective in vivo study aimed to compare the clinical behavior of a flowable composite resin (Genial Universal Flo, GC) and a nanohybrid universal composite resin (Tetric Evo Ceram, Ivoclar Vivadent) used in Class I and II direct esthetic restorations in posterior teeth.
A total of 108 Class I and II direct restorations were performed in patients aged between 20 and 60 years. The originality of this study lies in the fact that both materials were placed in pairs, in the same clinical environment (i.e., the same patient and the same type of tooth). The evaluations were performed now of restoration and after 2-weeks, 6-, 12-, and 24-months intervals using clinical examination, clinical photographs, and radiological examination, according to modified USPHS criteria. Statistical analysis was performed using the Fisher exact test and chi-square analysis.
At baseline, the universal composite resin showed better esthetic properties such as surface luster, surface staining marginal staining. Both materials regressed significantly over time with no significant difference between groups.
Both flowable and nanohybrid composite resins exhibit acceptable clinical performance. The present 24 months of evaluation of different composites showed that the G-ænial Universal Flo could be an effective esthetic material for posterior restoration. No significant difference between both materials over time concerning surface luster, surface staining, and marginal staining.
本前瞻性体内研究旨在比较用于后牙Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类直接美学修复的可流动复合树脂（Genial Universal Flo，GC）和纳米混合通用复合树脂（Tetric Evo Ceram，义获嘉伟瓦登特）的临床性能。
对年龄在20至60岁之间的患者进行了总共108次Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类直接修复。本研究的独特之处在于，两种材料均成对放置在相同的临床环境中（即同一患者和同一类型的牙齿）。根据改良的美国公共卫生署（USPHS）标准，在修复后即刻以及2周、6个月、12个月和24个月间隔时，使用临床检查、临床照片和放射学检查进行评估。采用Fisher精确检验和卡方分析进行统计分析。
在基线时，通用复合树脂表现出更好的美学性能，如表面光泽、表面染色、边缘染色。两种材料均随时间显著退变，组间无显著差异。
可流动复合树脂和纳米混合复合树脂均表现出可接受的临床性能。目前对不同复合材料进行的24个月评估表明，G-ænial Universal Flo可能是一种用于后牙修复的有效美学材料。两种材料在表面光泽、表面染色和边缘染色方面随时间无显著差异。
