IADR Abstract Archives
Clinical Evaluation of Restorations Made of ELS Versus APT Resin Composite
Objectives: This clinical trial evaluated the performance of low shrinkage resin composites in permanent teeth.
Methods: Between 12.12.2017 - 26.10.2018, 30 patients (22 females, 8 males, mean age: 25.2) referred to the Department of Restorative Dentistry, Medipol University, Dental School, Istanbul, Turkey, received randomly 30 pairs of restorations (N=60) using either ELS (Saremco, Switzerland) or APT composite (Saremco) in Class I and Class II cavities (CTRN: NCT03306576). Two operators performed all restorations and two independent calibrated operators evaluated the restorations 2 weeks after placement (baseline), at 6 months and 1 year using FDI criteria (Scores 1-5) for surface staining, marginal staining, marginal gap, marginal fracture, marginal irregularities, seconder caries, marginal tooth integrity, surface lusture, color match and translucency, fracture of material and retention, occlusal wear, approximal contact point, patient view, tooth integrity, post-operative sensitivity. The changes in the FDI parameters were analyzed using McNemar test (alpha=0.05) and Kaplan-Meier.
Results: Mean observation period was 7.8± 4.2 months. Patients rated the fillings highly satisfactory after 1 year. No cases of occlusal wear or loss of contact points requiring repair, incidence of endodontic complications or post-operative sensitivity was noted with both materials. Predominantly good colour match, no difference in shade and/or translucency or minor deviations were observed. At 6-month recall, one restoration from APT showed moderate marginal staining that did not require any intervention. For surface staining criteria (Score 2a) at 1-year recall two restorations (one from ELS and one from APT composite) showed distinct but acceptable deviations (Score 2b that did not affect the aesthetic results. One debonding (APT composite) and one fracture (ELS) were observed at 1-year recall. FDI parameters did not show significant difference between ELS and APT composite (p>0.05).
Conclusions: After 1-year follow-up period, both resin composite fillings tested presented good clinically acceptable results.
Methods: Between 12.12.2017 - 26.10.2018, 30 patients (22 females, 8 males, mean age: 25.2) referred to the Department of Restorative Dentistry, Medipol University, Dental School, Istanbul, Turkey, received randomly 30 pairs of restorations (N=60) using either ELS (Saremco, Switzerland) or APT composite (Saremco) in Class I and Class II cavities (CTRN: NCT03306576). Two operators performed all restorations and two independent calibrated operators evaluated the restorations 2 weeks after placement (baseline), at 6 months and 1 year using FDI criteria (Scores 1-5) for surface staining, marginal staining, marginal gap, marginal fracture, marginal irregularities, seconder caries, marginal tooth integrity, surface lusture, color match and translucency, fracture of material and retention, occlusal wear, approximal contact point, patient view, tooth integrity, post-operative sensitivity. The changes in the FDI parameters were analyzed using McNemar test (alpha=0.05) and Kaplan-Meier.
Results: Mean observation period was 7.8± 4.2 months. Patients rated the fillings highly satisfactory after 1 year. No cases of occlusal wear or loss of contact points requiring repair, incidence of endodontic complications or post-operative sensitivity was noted with both materials. Predominantly good colour match, no difference in shade and/or translucency or minor deviations were observed. At 6-month recall, one restoration from APT showed moderate marginal staining that did not require any intervention. For surface staining criteria (Score 2a) at 1-year recall two restorations (one from ELS and one from APT composite) showed distinct but acceptable deviations (Score 2b that did not affect the aesthetic results. One debonding (APT composite) and one fracture (ELS) were observed at 1-year recall. FDI parameters did not show significant difference between ELS and APT composite (p>0.05).
Conclusions: After 1-year follow-up period, both resin composite fillings tested presented good clinically acceptable results.