Comparison of the 2-year Clinical Performances of Class II Restorations Using Different Restorative Materials

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

110 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2021-10-18

Study Completion Date

2024-06-09

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of this study is to compare the clinical success of different filling materials used in the treatment of dental caries. Systemically healthy individuals with good oral hygiene and interproximal caries in their posterior teeth participated in the study. Participants underwent initial radiographic and intraoral examinations. Three different filling materials were applied to the participants' teeth. The restorations were evaluated at baseline, 1 year, and 2 years.

Related Clinical Trials

Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.

Clinical Evaluation of Bulk-fill Composite Resins in Class II Restorations

NCT04565860

Dental Composite

COMPLETED NA

Twenty-Four-Month Clinical Comparison of Two Bulk-Fill and Microhybrid Composite Restorations

NCT04306549

Dental Restoration Failure of Marginal Integrity

COMPLETED NA

Clinical Evaluation of Bulk-fill Restorative Materials

NCT06109987

Caries; Dentin

COMPLETED

Clinical Comparison of Composite Materials

NCT06058026

Caries; Dentin

COMPLETED

Clinical Comparison of Restorative Materials

NCT06637605

Dental Caries

ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of Class II carious defects restored with traditional posterior composite, bulk-fill composite, and high-fill flowable composite resin according to the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria at 12-month and 24-month intervals. In this study, 110 patients underwent initial radiographic and intraoral examinations. Radiographically, 259 teeth with interproximal caries at D1 and D2 levels were identified. All restorations in the study were performed by the same dentist. Before starting the restoration procedure, local anesthesia was administered to the tooth or teeth. The caries were removed and the preparation was completed. Following the washing and drying of the cavities, cotton rolls and saliva ejectors were placed to ensure isolation. An appropriate matrix system and wooden wedges were applied. A 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate solution was used as the cavity disinfectant. Subsequently, the enamel surfaces of the teeth were roughened for 30 seconds using a selective etching technique with 37% phosphoric acid. The universal dental adhesive system was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions..The first group received bulk-fill composite resin (Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative), the second group received traditional posterior composite (Clearfil Majesty Posterior ), and the third group received high-filler flowable composite resin. The same universal dental adhesive system was used for all groups. All restorations were evaluated by two experienced dentists according to the FDI evaluation criteria at baseline,1 year and 2 years. In cases where discrepancies were observed between the two examiners, the assessment was based on a consensus decision made by both dentists. Restorations were evaluated and scored separately for each criterion on a scale from 1 to 5: 1 = clinically excellent, 2 = clinically good, 3 = clinically adequate, 4 = clinically insufficient (requires repair), 5 = clinically poor (requires replacement).

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Dental Caries Class II

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Three groups with different restoration materials

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

While the materials used for the restorations were known to the practitioner, neither the patients nor the specialist dentists conducting the follow-up examinations were aware of them.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Bulk-fill Composite Resin

Before starting the restoration procedure, local anesthesia was administered to the tooth or teeth. The caries were removed and the preparation was completed. Following the washing and drying of the cavities, cotton rolls and saliva ejectors were placed to ensure isolation. An appropriate matrix system and wooden wedges were applied. A 0.2% chlorhexidine gluconate solution was used as the cavity disinfectant. Subsequently, the enamel surfaces of the teeth were roughened for 30 seconds using a selective etching technique with 37% phosphoric acid. The universal dental adhesive system was applied according to the manufacturer's instructions. Restorations were performed with Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative , ensuring that each layer did not exceed 4 mm in thickness.The restorations were evaluated according to FDI criteria at baseline, 1 year and 2 years.

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR