Nanohybrid versus nanofill composite in class I cavities: margin analysis after 12 months

The optical behavior of nano filled resin composite loaded with graphene oxide nanoparticles

OBJECTIVES

Assessment of the effect of incorporation of graphene oxide nanoparticles (GONPs), different concentrations into resin composite with different thicknesses on its color modulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

GONPs were prepared using the chemical reduction method and characterized using a transmission electron microscope and X-ray diffraction. The minimum concentrations of GONPs that provided the most effective antibacterial action (0.05 wt% and 0.2 wt%.) were prepared to be the concentration added to the tested resin composite. Calculations were done to find the required volume of the GONPs solution needed according to the mass of the resin composite. 70 nano-filled resin composite discs were prepared with 10 mm diameter × 3 mm height. 10 resin composite discs were prepared without GONPs incorporation and served as a control (G0). The other 60 resin composite specimens were divided into 2 equal groups (G1& G2) according to the concentration of the loaded nanoparticles in the specimens. Each group was divided into 3 equal subgroups according to the thickness of the resin composite containing GONPs; [T1: GONPs dispersed in the bottom 1 mm of the disc, while the top 2 mm of the disc was of resin composite only. T2: GONPs dispersed only in the bottom 2 mm of the disc and T3: GONPs dispersed in the total thickness of the disc (3 mm)]. ∆E values were calculated using a Vita Easy shade Spectrophotometer.

RESULTS

Incorporation of GONPs into resin composite induced significant color change and among all the 6 experimental groups, G1T1 group (of 0.05 wt% concentration GONPs dispersed only in the bottom 1 mm of the disc) showed a non-significant color change.

CONCLUSION

Dispersion of GONPs has a detectable effect on the color change of resin composite. Meanwhile, dispersion in low concentration for only the bottom 1 mm thickness of resin composite has an undetectable effect on its color.

Clinical Performance of Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Restorations Using the United States Public Health Service and Federation Dentaire Internationale Criteria: A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective  This study was aimed to compare the 12-month clinical performance of two full-body bulk-fill resin composites Filtek bulk fill/3M ESPE (FBF) and Tetric EvoCeram bulk fill/Ivoclar Vivadent (TBF) and a conventional microhybrid resin composite Filtek Z250/3M ESPE (Z250) using the modified the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) and Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria. Also, the agreement between the two evaluation criteria was evaluated at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up.

Materials and Methods  A total of 138 class I and II restorations were placed in posterior teeth (split-mouth design) of 46 volunteers following manufacturer’s instructions and bonded with a self-etching bonding agent (Clear fill SE Bond/Kuraray). The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 12 months of follow-up by three previously calibrated dentists (Cohen’s K = 0.84).

Statistical Analysis  Fisher’s exact test and Pearson’s Chi-squared test were used to evaluating the homogeneity of distribution of the clinical characteristics. Friedman’s test was applied to evaluate differences among the resin composites. The results obtained for the USPHS and FDI criteria at the different observation times were compared using the Wilcoxon test. A level of significance of 0.05 was adopted for all tests.

Results  After 12 months (recall rate, 78.3%, n = 36 patients), the overall success rate was 99.07% for both criteria. Only one failed restoration (0.93%) was detected for each system during follow-up in the TBF group.

Conclusion  The bulk-fill resin composites showed satisfactory clinical performance compared with conventional resin composite after 12 months. The percentage of the acceptable scores was significantly higher for the USPHS criteria, due to discrepancies in the score description for each criterion.

Do Nanofilled/Nanohybrid Composites Allow for Better Clinical Performance of Direct Restorations Than Traditional Microhybrid Composites? A Systematic Review

This systematic review was carried out to assess the clinical effectiveness of nanofilled and nanohybrid composites used for direct restorations in comparison with microhybrid composites. The guidelines for the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses were followed. A search of articles published from July 1996 to February 2017 was performed in PubMed, SciVerse Scopus, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences, the Scientific Electronic Library Online, and the Cochrane Library. The present review selected only randomized controlled trials comparing the clinical performance of a nanofilled or nanohybrid composite for direct restorations with that of a microhybrid composite. The research found 201 studies. Twenty-one articles fulfilled the criteria of the present review. However, the included studies were characterized by great methodological diversities. As a general trend, nanofilled and nanohybrid composites were found to be capable of clinical performance, marginal quality, and resistance to wear similar to that of traditional composites without showing improved surface characteristics. The risk of bias of included studies was judged unclear or high. The clinical performance of nanofilled/nanohybrid composites was found to be comparable to that of traditional composites in the posterior area. The data concerning anterior and cervical restorations were insufficient. With regard to the esthetic properties, there is a compelling need for studies on anterior teeth in which the operators are kept unaware of the restorative material. Nanofilled/nanohybrid composites seem to be a valid alternative to traditional microhybrid composites, and at the moment, there is low-level evidence attesting a lack of their superiority.

Nanofilled Resin Composite Properties and Clinical Performance: A Review

The aim of this review was to compile recent evidence related to nanofilled resin composite materials regarding the properties and clinical performance. Special attention was given to mechanical properties, such as strength, hardness, abrasive wear, water sorption, and solubility. The clinical performance of nanocomposite materials compared with hybrid resin composites was also addressed in terms of retention and success rates, marginal adaptation, color match, and surface roughness. A search of English peer-reviewed dental literature (2003-2017) from PubMed and MEDLINE databases was conducted using the terms "nanocomposites" or "nanofilled resin composite" and "clinical evaluation." The list was screened, and 82 papers that were relevant to the objectives of this work were included in the review. Mechanical properties of nanocomposites are generally comparable to those of hybrid composites but higher than microfilled composites. Nanocomposites presented lower abrasive wear than hybrids but higher sorption values. Their clinical performance was comparable to that of hybrid composites.

Evaluation of the clinical success of class I cavities prepared by an Er:YAG laser-5-year follow-up study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate, after 5 years, the clinical success of preparing class 1 composite resin restorations with an Er:YAG laser. Sixty-five teeth of 30 patients were included in the study, and an Er:YAG laser emitting at a wavelength of 2.94 μm was used for the class I cavity preparations with not more than one third of the mesiodistal width of the occlusal surfaces of each tooth. All cavities were restored with a light-cured composite resin, following a single bond application. After the baseline examination, restorations were reevaluated by the same experienced clinician after 5 years, using the modified Ryge criteria. At the end of 5 years, 41 of the 65 restorations were evaluated in 22 patients and scored. With respect to marginal discoloration, anatomic form, color match, and surface texture, significant differences were found between baselines tested after 5 years. Clinical evaluation of postoperative sensitivity showed that 90.2 % were rated as alpha. All restorations evaluated in this study demonstrated acceptable clinical performance within the evaluation period based on the alpha and bravo ratings for clinically satisfactory restorations. Further evaluations are necessary for a better clinical performance analysis.