Clinical Evaluation of Bulk-fill Flowable Composite versus Traditional nano-hybrid Composites in Posterior Teeth

Main Article Content

Jazib Pervez
Bushra Ghani
Usman Ashraf
Farrukh Ahmed
Bismah Ishaq
Samiya Aziz

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate and compare the clinical performance of bulk-fill flowable composites and conventional nano-hybrid composites to restore posterior teeth.


Methodology: A Randomized controlled trial was conducted at Bakhtawar Amin Dental College, Multan, from July 2022 to Jun 2023. A total of 140 subjects were included in the study, with 70 assigned to the bulk-fill flowable composite group (Group A) and 70 to the traditional composite group (Group B). The restorations were assessed for retention, marginal integrity, and postoperative sensitivity over a 3-month follow-up period. Data was analyzed with SPSS version 26.0.


Results: 28 teeth were dropped out of the study, leaving 112 teeth. No significant differences were found between the two groups (A and B) in restoration outcomes according to USPHS criteria (taking p > 0.05 as significant), with chi-square values of 1.46 (p = 0.48), 2.53 (p = 0.28), and 3.77 (p = 0.15) for restoration retention, marginal integrity, and postoperative sensitivity, respectively.


Conclusion: Both bulk-fill flowable composite and traditional composite materials in posterior teeth restorations show favorable clinical performance in terms of restoration retention and marginal integrity with minimal post-operative sensitivity. However, further research is needed to assess the long-term performance of these materials.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Pervez J, Ghani B, Ashraf U, Ahmed F, Ishaq B, Aziz S. Clinical Evaluation of Bulk-fill Flowable Composite versus Traditional nano-hybrid Composites in Posterior Teeth. J Postgrad Med Inst [Internet]. 2024 Sep. 30 [cited 2024 Dec. 5];38(3). Available from: https://www.jpmi.org.pk/index.php/jpmi/article/view/3347
Section
Original Article

References

Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology. Dent Mater. 2011;27(4):348-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.11.014.

Sekundo C, Fazeli S, Felten A, Schoilew K, Wolff D, Frese C. A randomized clinical split-mouth trial of a bulk-fill and a nanohybrid composite restorative in class II cavities: Three-year results. Dent Mater. 2022;38(5):759-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2022.02.005.

Flury S, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A. Influence of increment thickness on microhardness and dentin bond strength of bulk fill resin composites. Dent Mater. 2014;30(10):1104-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.001.

Ilie N, Bucuta S, Draenert M. Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance. Oper Dent. 2013;38: 618-25. DOI: 10.2341/12-395-L.

Benetti AR, Havndrup-Pedersen C, Honore D, Pedersen MK, Pallesen U. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization contraction, depth of cure, and gap formation. Oper Dent.2015;40:190-200. DOI: 10.2341/13-324-L.

Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites. Clin Oral Investig.2009;13:427-38. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-009-0258-4.

Francis A, Braxton A, Ahmad W, Tantbirojn D, Simon J, Versluis A. Cuspal flexure and extent of a bulk-fill flowable base composite cure. Oper Dent.2015;40:515-23.DOI: DOI: 10.2341/14-235-L.

Van Ende A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B. bulk-filling affects the bonding efficacy in occlusal Class I cavities. J Adhes Dent.2016;18:119-24.DOI: 10.3290/j.jad.a35636.

Kaida K, Kubo S, Egoshi T, Taira Y. Eight-year clinical evaluation of two types of resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions. Clin Oral Investig.2022;26:6327-37. DOI:10.1007/s00784-022-04587-7.

Van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U. 2016: Posterior bulk-filled resin composite restorations: A 5-year randomized controlled clinical study. J Dent.2016;51:29-35. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.06.002.

Agarwal RS, Hiremath H, Agarwal J, Garg A. Evaluation of cervical marginal and internal adaptation using newer bulk fill composites: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent.2015;18:56-61. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.148897.

Roggendorf MJ, Kramer N, Appelt A, Naumann M, Frankenberger R. Marginal quality of flowable 4-mm base vs. conventionally layered resin composite. J Dent.2011;39:643-47.DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.07.004.

Microleakage at enamel and dentin margins with a bulk fill flowable resin (Scotti N, Comba A, Gambino A, Paolino DS, Alovisi M, Pasqualini D, Berutti E, Eur J Dent. 2014; 8:1-8.DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.126230.

Jasinski P, Sobiech P, Korporowicz E, Gozdowski D, Olczak-Kowalczyk D. Clinical evaluation of restorative materials for primary teeth. European Academy of Pediatric Dentistry, Strasbourg, 2012, OPD:185.