Clinical Evaluation of Flowable Composite Materials in Permanent Molars Small Class I Restorations: 3-Year Double Blind Clinical Study

Cavity preparation and cementation of indirect adhesive posterior restorations using three different composite resins with a one-year follow-up: A clinical report

Adhesive cementation of contemporary indirect restorations can be achieved using a composite resin. An established protocol with preheated composite resin was used, along with 2 recently introduced types of composite resin. All 3 are evaluated for clinical performance.

Time-and cost-effective 3-dimensional-printing workflow to rehabilitate worn dentitions: A clinical report

Current restorative methods of restoring worn or eroded dentition present drawbacks that may deter dentists or patients from pursuing complete mouth rehabilitation. A novel additive manufacturing approach using 3D printed definitive composite resin restorations is described as a less technique-sensitive and more cost-effective alternative. These restorations are straightforward to repair, modify, or replace.

Influence of Cavity Lining on the 3-Year Clinical Outcome of Posterior Composite Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

The purpose of this randomized, split-mouth-designed controlled and single-blinded clinical study was to evaluate the 3-year clinical performance of Class I and Class II resin composite restorations placed with or without cavity lining with a flowable composite. Fifty patients with treatment needs in two premolars or molars were included. One of the teeth was restored using the nanohybrid composite (Grandio®SO, control group), in the test group a high viscosity flowable composite was additionally applied as a first layer. In both groups, the same self-etch adhesive system was applied. Clinical evaluation after 3 years was carried out using the modified USPHS/Ryge criteria. At the 3-year follow-up the recall rate was 92%. Four restorations failed in the test group (8.7%), three due to the loss of vitality and one after fracture. The control group exhibited a cumulative success rate of 100%, while the test group achieved a success rate of 91.3%. This led to significant differences in the annual failure rate (AFR) between the two groups, with rates of 0% and 2.9% (p < 0.05; Mann-Whitney U-test). After 3 years the cumulative survival rate including all restorations was 95.7%. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences for the parameters: tooth vitality, marginal discoloration, success rate, and AFR. The other parameters exhibited no significant differences. Consequently, the nanohybrid composite demonstrated excellent performance over a 3-year period, whereas the utilization of a flowable composite for the cavity lining did not appear to exert a beneficial influence on clinical outcomes.

Efficiency of 3D printed composite resin restorations compared with subtractive materials: Evaluation of fatigue behavior, cost, and time of production

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Three-dimensionally (3D)-printed composite resins have been marketed as materials for definitive restorations. However, limited information is available regarding the stability of the adhesive interface and the efficiency of 3D printed composite resins.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the integrity of the marginal adhesive interface before and after thermal and mechanical fatigue of an initial formulation of a 3D printed composite resin and to evaluate the efficiency of this manufacturing method.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Freshly extracted molars were prepared for onlays and adhesively restored with either 3D printed composite resin (VarseoSmile Crown Plus) (Group 3D), milled composite resin (Tetric CAD) (Group MCOMP), milled PMMA (Telio CAD) (Group PMMA), and milled lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) (Group EM). Marginal analysis was performed under a scanning electron microscope before and after fatigue by thermomechanical cyclic loading, and initial and terminal percentages of continuous margin (%CM) were compared. The time required for the production of each type of restoration was recorded, and the production costs were also compared.

RESULTS

Before aging, 3D, MCOMP, and EM presented comparable values of %CM (69.8%, 75.9%, and 63.1%, respectively) that were statistically significantly higher (P<.05) than those of PMMA (45.1%). After aging, 3D and EM had comparable results (44.7% and 43.7%, respectively), which were lower than those of the MCOMP group (68.5%) but higher than those of the PMMA group (20.5%). Regarding time efficiency, 3D printing took less time than MCOMP or PMMA if more than 8 restorations were fabricated. For the production costs, 3D printing was 5.5, 8.7, and 10.2 times less expensive than PMMA, MCOMP, and EM, respectively. The initial equipment cost was also lower for the additive manufacturing method. However, 3D printing did not always considerably reduce waste.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of marginal adaptation, the evaluated initial formulation of a 3D printed composite resin behaved similarly to other well-established definitive restoration materials and better than milled PMMA, both before and after fatigue. Three-dimensionally printed resins present advantages in terms of equipment and consumable costs, even for a single restoration, but also for production time when more than 8 restorations were fabricated.

Clinical evaluation of subgingival open sandwich restorations: 3-year results of a randomized double-blind trial

OBJECTIVES

To provide a 3-year follow-up of previously treated patients to assess and compare the periodontal responses and clinical performance of proximal subgingival open sandwich restorations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-five adults participated in the study, with a combined total of 120 compound Class II cavities. These cavities had gingival margins located below the CEJ. Four different restorative materials were used to elevate the dentin/cementum gingival margins of the cavities: resin-modified glass ionomer, glass hybrid, flowable bulk-fill composite, or ion-releasing material, which were then completed with the same overlaying composite. Different periodontal and clinical evaluations, based on the criteria set by the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria, were performed at different time intervals, including baseline, 6 months, 1, 2, and 3 years.

RESULTS

The type of base material did not affect the periodontal evaluations. There were no statistically significant differences between different time intervals or base material groups in any of the evaluated FDI parameters. However, the ion-releasing material scored significantly worse in the radiographic evaluation than any of the other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

All tested materials are suitable for proximal subgingival open sandwich restorations, as long as the restoration/tooth margin is at least 2-mm away from the bone crest.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Clinicians can confidently choose any of the tested materials for proximal subgingival open sandwich restorations, as they have shown good outcomes from both periodontal and clinical perspectives.

Survival Rates of Glass versus Hybrid Ceramics in Partial Prosthetic Restorations: A Scoping Review with Emphasis on Adhesive Protocols

As dental practices and methodologies evolve, the emergence of novel materials adds complexity to clinical choices. While glass ceramics, particularly those based on lithium disilicate and leucite-reinforced variants, have been extensively researched and are well regarded for their attributes, hybrid ceramics remain relatively recent area of research that is less investigated. This review aims to evaluate the durability of glass and hybrid ceramics while assessing the role of various adhesive techniques on restoration longevity. Using a comprehensive search of PubMed and EMBASE, 84 articles from the past decade were found. Only eleven met the set criteria for analysis. The results underscore the urgent need for the extended monitoring of partial prosthetic restorations. The existing literature has significant gaps, hindering the attainment of dependable insights about these materials' long-term performance. For a clearer understanding of how different ceramic systems affect restoration survival rates, rigorous research involving more participants and uniform outcome documentation is vital.

Dental Caries and Its Management

Objectives

In recent years, the management of dental caries has evolved significantly. Caries prevention, early detection, and a diagnosis based on risk indicators and risk factor assessments are the most current practical approaches. Furthermore, as proposed in minimally invasive dentistry, the new management approaches preserve healthy tissue and maintain pulp vitality. This article overviews the latest minimally invasive dental caries management and treatment options. The information will assist the reader in the early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of dental caries.

Materials and Methods

The PubMed (MEDLINE) search engine was used to gather the most relevant information on dental caries. The search was restricted to five years (May 30, 2018-May 29, 2022), and only English-language studies were accessed. A Boolean search of the PubMed data set was implemented to combine a range of keywords. The following filters were applied: abstract, free full text, full text, clinical trial, randomised control trial, systematic review, meta-analysis, and review. More studies were also obtained by manual searches from Google Scholar and textbooks on dental caries.

Results

By using this process, 683 articles and studies were obtained. The most relevant published studies were chosen and used in the current review. The selected articles are included in the references list. However, the search extended to cover the last five years as our understanding and management of dental caries have changed significantly.

Conclusions

Early detection and diagnosis of caries based on risk indicators and risk factor assessments are effective. Furthermore, minimally invasive restorative techniques are beneficial in managing dental caries and preserving healthy tissue and should be used whenever possible. This new information, knowledge, and materials should encourage professionals to implement this method. Having a strategy and system based on patient-centred care is critical, and our dental responsibilities must prioritise patient-centred care.