Abstract
Objectives. To evaluate the clinical performance of two flowable composites for restoring Class-V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs), one with novel (ND; N'Durance((R)) Dimer Flow, Septodont) and one with modified conventional matrix composition (FS; Filtek (TM) Supreme XTE Flow, 3M-ESPE). The null hypothesis was that both flowable composites perform equally regarding clinical quality and ...
Abstract
Objectives. To evaluate the clinical performance of two flowable composites for restoring Class-V non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs), one with novel (ND; N'Durance((R)) Dimer Flow, Septodont) and one with modified conventional matrix composition (FS; Filtek (TM) Supreme XTE Flow, 3M-ESPE). The null hypothesis was that both flowable composites perform equally regarding clinical quality and survival. Methods. 50 patients received one ND and one FS restoration of NCCLs in premolars using Clearfil Protect Bond (Kuraray) as an adhesive. Restorations were evaluated by two examiners at baseline (BL), 18 and 36 months employing FDI criteria. Non-parametric statistical analyses and chi(2) tests were applied (alpha = 0.05). Results. 48 patients with both restorations under risk participated in the 36-mo recall. One patient terminated participation after the 18-mo recall. One ND restoration failed at the 18-mo recall (fracture). One FS restoration failed during clinical examination at the 36-mo recall (debonding). 95.8% of restorations each were rated clinically acceptable at 36-mo. No significant differences for all selected FDI criteria were recorded between ND and FS at each examination time point except for the criteria surface staining at 36-mo and marginal staining at 18-mo and 36-mo, where FS showed significantly better results. For each material, no significant differences over time were detected, except for loss of surface lustre for FS (BL to 18 months). Significance. Within the limitations of the study, the null hypothesis that materials perform equally could not be rejected. Both flowable composites performed equally regarding survival and similarly regarding clinical performance. (C) 2016 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Altmetric