These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: 30-Month randomised clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance of a nanofill and a nanohybrid composite.
    Author: de Andrade AK, Duarte RM, Medeiros e Silva FD, Batista AU, Lima KC, Pontual ML, Montes MA.
    Journal: J Dent; 2011 Jan; 39(1):8-15. PubMed ID: 20888884.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical performance of a nanofill and a nanohybrid composite in restorations in occlusal cavities of posterior teeth in a randomised trial over 30 months. METHODS: Forty-one adolescents participated in the study. The teeth were restored with a nanofill (Filtek Z350, 3M ESPE), a nanohybrid (Esthet-X, Dentsply); Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE) was used as a control. After 30 months, the restorations were evaluated in accordance with the US Public Health Service (USPHS) modified criteria. The McNemar and Friedman tests were used for statistical analysis, at a level of significance of 5%. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the roughness of Filtek Z250 (p=0.008) and Filtek Z350 (p<0.001) when the four time periods (baseline, 6 months, 12 months and 30 months) were compared. There were significant differences in the marginal adaptation of Filtek Z250 (p=0.001), Filtek Z350 (p<0.001) and Esthet-X (p=0.011). Except for one of each composite restoration, all the modifications ranged from Alpha to Bravo. There were significant differences in the surface roughness (p=0.005) when the three composites were compared after 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: The materials investigated showed acceptable clinical performance after 30 months. Long-term re-evaluations are necessary for a more detailed analysis of these composites (CEP: #1252).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]