Ali A Elkaffas, Dr, clinical assistant professor, Operative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura Aldakhlia, Egypt.
Radwa I Eltoukhy, Dr, clinical assistant professor, Operative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Aldakhlia, Egypt.
Oper Dent. 2022 Jan 1;47(1):11-19. doi: 10.2341/20-301-C.
This study evaluated the effect of preheating resin composites (RCs) on the clinical performance of class I restorations during a 36-month period using a split-mouth, double-blinded randomized design.
A total of 35 patients were selected. Every patient received one pair of class I nanofilled resin composite (RC, Filtek Z350 XT) posterior restorations (n=70). One side of the mouth received preheated composites; on the other side, the composite was placed in a nonheated state following the manufacturer's instructions. These restorations were evaluated at 1-week (baseline), 12-months, 24-months, and 36-months using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria. The statistical analyses were also performed using the Wilcoxon and Friedman tests with the level of significance set at 0.05.
After 36 months, 33 patients attended the recall visits, and 66 restorations were evaluated. The Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests revealed insignificant differences between both groups (p>0.05) for all FDI parameters. However, a significant difference was detected for staining as a criterion at 36 months (p=0.01). Moreover, a significant difference in the staining was detected when the baseline and 36 months were compared in the nonheated RC group (p=0.001). For esthetic, functional, and biological properties, the nonheated composite exhibited 93.9%, 100%, and 100% of the clinically accepted scores, respectively, and the preheated group presented 100% for all properties. Four restorations had postoperative sensitivity at baseline for nonheated (11.4%) and five for preheated (14.2%), but the postoperative sensitivity scores were considered highly acceptable at 12-, 24-, and 36-months.
After 36 months, preheated nanofilled RCs showed an acceptable clinical performance similar to that of the nonheated ones in class I restorations, but with better resistance to marginal staining.
本研究采用分口、双盲随机设计，评估在 36 个月期间对 I 类修复体进行预加热树脂复合材料（RC）对临床性能的影响。
共选择了 35 名患者。每位患者均接受一对 I 类纳米填充树脂复合材料（RC，Filtek Z350 XT）后牙修复体（n=70）。一侧口腔接受预加热的复合材料；另一侧口腔则按照制造商的说明在非加热状态下放置复合材料。这些修复体在 1 周（基线）、12 个月、24 个月和 36 个月时使用 FDI 世界牙科联合会标准进行评估。统计分析也使用 Wilcoxon 和 Friedman 检验进行，显著性水平设置为 0.05。
36 个月后，33 名患者接受了召回就诊，共评估了 66 个修复体。Friedman 和 Wilcoxon 符号秩检验显示两组之间所有 FDI 参数均无显著差异（p>0.05）。然而，在 36 个月时，染色作为标准存在显著差异（p=0.01）。此外，在非加热 RC 组中，基线和 36 个月时的染色差异具有显著性（p=0.001）。对于美观、功能和生物学特性，非加热复合材料分别表现出 93.9%、100%和 100%的临床可接受评分，而加热组在所有特性上均为 100%。非加热组有 4 个修复体在基线时有术后敏感（11.4%），加热组有 5 个修复体（14.2%），但在 12、24 和 36 个月时，术后敏感评分被认为是高度可接受的。
36 个月后，预加热纳米填充 RC 在 I 类修复体中表现出可接受的临床性能，与非加热 RC 相似，但对边缘染色的抵抗力更好。
