» Articles » PMID: 17473040

A Clinical Evaluation of a Self-etching Primer and a Giomer Restorative Material: Results at Eight Years

Overview
Journal J Am Dent Assoc
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2007 May 3
PMID 17473040
Citations 18
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The authors evaluated the performance of a giomer restorative material (Beautifil, Shofu, Kyoto, Japan) with a self-etching primer (FL-Bond, Shofu) for posterior restorations.

Materials And Methods: Two clinicians placed 26 Class I restorations and 35 Class II restorations in 31 patients ranging in age from 21 to 62 years (mean age, 34 years). Inclusion criteria required patients to have molar-supported permanent dentition free of any edentulous spaces and no clinically significant occlusal interference, as well as one or more permanent molars or premolars requiring new or replacement Class I or II restorations. Two of the authors examined the restorations using modified U.S. Public Health Service/Ryge criteria for color match, marginal adaptation, anatomy, surface roughness, marginal staining, interfacial staining, proximal and occlusal contacts, secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity and luster.

Results: The two authors examined all restorations at the one-year recall visit, 58 at the two-year visit, 47 at the three-year visit, 39 at the four-year visit and 41 at the eight-year visit (16 Class I and 25 Class II restorations). During the eight-year period, they detected no changes with respect to surface roughness, postoperative sensitivity or secondary caries. The majority of changes recorded were for marginal adaptation at occlusal (29 percent) and proximal (16 percent) surfaces and marginal staining at occlusal (15 percent) and proximal (32 percent) surfaces. The McNemar test showed significant changes between baseline and the eight-year evaluation only for marginal adaptation at occlusal surfaces (P = .0047) and marginal staining at proximal surfaces (P = .04). None of the restorations failed.

Conclusion: Most of the restorations maintained good quality during the observation period.

Clinical Implications: Beautiful restorative material and FL-Bond bonding system, when placed in Class I and II preparations, achieved clinically acceptable results after eight years of service.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of the Effects of Thermal Aging on the Surface Roughness of Novel Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials.

Galbraith A, Abubakr N Dent J (Basel). 2024; 12(12).

PMID: 39727447 PMC: 11674361. DOI: 10.3390/dj12120390.


Comparative Evaluation of Two Esthetic Full Coronal Restorative Materials for Primary Incisors.

Dhaker K, Tandon S, Rathore A, Mathur R, Rai T, Sharma S Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024; 17(3):321-327.

PMID: 39144508 PMC: 11320800. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2787.


Do bioactive materials show greater retention rates in restoring permanent teeth than non-bioactive materials? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Fernandes J, Contreras S, da Silva Spinola M, Batista G, Bresciani E, Caneppele T Clin Oral Investig. 2023; 28(1):44.

PMID: 38153565 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-023-05414-3.


Expert consensus on early childhood caries management.

Zou J, Du Q, Ge L, Wang J, Wang X, Li Y Int J Oral Sci. 2022; 14(1):35.

PMID: 35835750 PMC: 9283525. DOI: 10.1038/s41368-022-00186-0.


Optical properties and masking capacity of flowable giomers.

Rusnac M, Gasparik C, Delean A, Aghiorghiesei A, Dudea D Med Pharm Rep. 2021; 94(1):99-105.

PMID: 33629056 PMC: 7880075. DOI: 10.15386/mpr-1924.