Clinical evaluation of a self-adhering flowable composite as occlusal restorative material in primary molars: one-year results

Year 2019, Volume: 53 Issue: 3, 119 - 124, 01.10.2019

Buse Ayşe Serin İffet Yazıcıoğlu Ceren Deveci Muharrem Cem Doğan

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the 1 year clinical performances of a self-adhering flowable composite and a commercially available self-etch adhesive/composite system in occlusal restorations of primary second molars.
Patients and Methods: Thirty-one patients (10 male, 21 female) were recruited into the study. A total of 62 occlusal cavities were restored with either a universal composite or a self-adhering flowable composite according to manufacturers' instructions. The restorations were clinically evaluated 1 month after placement as baseline, and after 3, 6 months and 1 year post-operatively using modified USPHS criteria by two operators.
Results: Lack of retention was not observed in any of the restorations. With respect to color match, marginal adaptation, secondary caries and surface texture, no significant differences were found between two restorative materials tested after 1 year. None of the restorations had marginal discoloration and anatomic form loss on the 1 year follow-up. Restorations did not exhibit post-operative sensitivity at any evaluation period.
Conclusion: The clinical assessment of self-adhering flowable composite exhibited good clinical results with predominating alpha scores after 1 year. Advantage of the application convenience for children is promising for self-adhered flowable composite materials in pediatric use.

Keywords

self-adhesive, restorative, primary, children, dentition, caries

Supporting Institution

The author declared that this study has received no financial support.

References

• 1. Wright JW. The burden and management of dental caries in older children. Pediatr Clin North Am 2018; 65(5):955-963.
• 2. Vichi A, Margvelashvili M, Goracci C, Papacchini F, Ferrari M. Bonding and sealing ability of a new self-adhering flowable composite resin in class I restorations. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1497-1506.
• 3. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129:567-577.
• 4. Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M, Papadogiannis Y, Lakes RS, Dionysopoulos P, Apadogiannis D. Dynamic and static elastic moduli of packable and flowable composite resins and their developmentafter initial photo curing. Dent Mater 2006;22:450-459.
• 5. Labella R, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, Vanherle G. Polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composites and filled adhesives. Dent Mater 1999;15:128-37.
• 6. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent 2001;26:302-307.
• 7. Unterbrink GL, Liebenberg WH. Flowable resin composites as “filled adhesives”: literature review and clinical recommendations. Quintessence Int 1999;30:249–257.
• 8. Cantekin K, Buyuk SK. Shear bond strength of a new low-shrinkage flowable composite for orthodontic bracket bonding. J Dent Child (Chic) 2014;81:63-66.
• 9. Peterson J, Rizk M, Hoch M, Wiegand A. Bonding performance of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel, dentin and a nano-hybrid composite. Odontology 2018;106:171-180.
• 10. Rainer H, Michael JW, Michael JN. Marginal and internal adaptation of extended class I restorations lined with flowable composites. Journal of Dentistry 2003;31:231-239.
• 11. Baroudi K, Rodrigues J. Flowable resin composites: a systematic review and clinical considerations. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 2015;9:ZE18-ZE24.
• 12. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Int J Surg 2011;9:672–677. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.09.004.
• 13. Zanatta RF, da Silva TM, Esper MALR, Bresciani E, Caneppele TMF, Gonçalves SEP. Guidelines for conducting split-mouth clinical studies in restorative dentistry. Brazilian Dent Sci 2017;20:29. doi:10.14295/bds.2017.v20i2.1404.
• 14. Bayne SC1, Schmalz G. Reprinting the classic article on USPHS evaluation methods for measuring the clinical research performance of restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig 2005;9:209-214.
• 15. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods 2007;39:175-191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146.12.
• 16. Fu J1, Kakuda S, Pan F,et al. Bonding performance of a newly developed step-less all-in-one system on dentin. Dent Mater 2013;322:203-211.
• 17. Corona SA, Borsatto MC, Garcia L, Ramos RP, Palma-Dibb RG. Randomized, controlled trial comparing the retention of a flowable restorative system with a conventional resin sealant: one-year follow up. Int J Paediatr Dent 2005;15:44-50.
• 18. Goldberg AJ, Rydinge E, Santucci EA, Racz WB. Clinical evaluation methods for posterior composite restorations. J Dent Res 1984;63:1387-1391.
• 19. Kim KL1, Namgung C, Cho BH. The effect of clinical performance on the survival estimates of direct restorations. Restor Dent Endod 2013;38:11-20.
• 20. Vann WF Jr, Barkmeier WW, Mahler DB. Assessing composite resin wear in primary molars: four-year findings. J Dent Res 1988;67:876-879.
• 21. Lewis G. In vivo occlusal wear of posterior composite restorations. Oper Dent 1991;16:61-69.
• 22. Pacifici E, Chazine M, Vichi A, Grandini S, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Shear-bond strength of a new self-adhering flowable restorative material to dentin of primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38:149-154.
• 23. Tuloglu N, Sen Tunc E, Ozer S, Bayrak S. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite on dentin with and without application of an adhesive system. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014;12:97-101.
• 24. Pacifici E, Chazine M, Vichi A, Grandini S, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Shear-bond strength of a new self-adhering flowable restorative material to dentin of primary molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;38:149-154.
• 25. Rengo C1, Goracci C, Juloski J,et al. Influence of phosphoric acid etching on microleakage of a self-etch adhesive and a self-adhering composite. Aust Dent J 2012;57:220-226.
• 26. Dias KR, de Andrade CB, Wait TT, Chamon R, Ammari MM, Soviero VM, Lobo L, de Almeida Neves A, Maia LC, Fonseca-Gonçalves A. Efficacy of sealing occlusal caries with a flowable composite in primary molars: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent 2018;74:49-55. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2018.05.014.
• 27. Sachdeva P, Goswami M, Singh D. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and nanoleakage of conventional and self-adhering flowable composites to primary teeth dentin, Contemp. Clin Dent 2016;7:326. doi:10.4103/0976-237x.188549.
• 28. Carvalho RM, Manso AP, Geraldeli S, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Durability of bonds and clinical success of adhesive restorations. Dental materials 2012;28:72-86.