Next Article in Journal
Association between Early Childhood Caries and Quality of Life: Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale and Pufa Index
Previous Article in Journal
Early Diagnosis on Oral and Potentially Oral Malignant Lesions: A Systematic Review on the VELscope® Fluorescence Method
Article

Flowable Bulk-Fill Materials Compared to Nano Ceramic Composites for Class I Cavities Restorations in Primary Molars: A Two-Year Prospective Case-Control Study

1
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Medical Firm Vital EBB, 136 Shejnkmana str., 620144 Ekaterinburg, Russia
2
Institute of Immunology and Physiology (IIP) of the Ural Division of Russian Academy of Sciences, 620002 Ekaterinburg, Russia
3
Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, 19 Mira street, 620002 Ekaterinburg, Russian
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Dent. J. 2019, 7(4), 94; https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7040094
Received: 31 July 2019 / Revised: 8 September 2019 / Accepted: 10 September 2019 / Published: 25 September 2019
(This article belongs to the Section Restorative Dentistry and Traumatology)
Background: The aim of this split-mouth study is to compare the results of 24 months’ clinical performance of primary molar Class I restorations with a nano-ceramic composite, Ceram•X mono (Dentsply) with a flowable bulk-fill material regular viscosity, SDR (Dentsply). Methods: Following the ethical approval, 27 patients with at least two class I cavities in primary molars were included in the study. A total number of 54 restorations were conducted (n = 27 for Ceram X and n = 27 for SDR). Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 18, and 24 months, according to the modified Ryge criteria. The cavosurface marginal discoloration and color match were evaluated visually after air-drying the tooth and after removing the plaque (if necessary). Results: At 24 months’ follow-up, 54 restorations showed similar clinical performance. The statistical analysis did not reveal any statistical significance in the values between the groups in 7 out of 7 modified Ryge criteria. However, two restorations in both groups received Bravo ratings in the cavosurface marginal discoloration scoring. No side effects were reported by the participants of the study. Conclusion: Restorations with both materials (Ceram•X mono and SDR) have provided almost identical results. View Full-Text
Keywords: class I cavities; flowable bulk-fill materials; nano-ceramic composites; pediatric dentistry restorations; primary teeth caries class I cavities; flowable bulk-fill materials; nano-ceramic composites; pediatric dentistry restorations; primary teeth caries
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Sarapultseva, M.; Sarapultsev, A. Flowable Bulk-Fill Materials Compared to Nano Ceramic Composites for Class I Cavities Restorations in Primary Molars: A Two-Year Prospective Case-Control Study. Dent. J. 2019, 7, 94. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7040094

AMA Style

Sarapultseva M, Sarapultsev A. Flowable Bulk-Fill Materials Compared to Nano Ceramic Composites for Class I Cavities Restorations in Primary Molars: A Two-Year Prospective Case-Control Study. Dentistry Journal. 2019; 7(4):94. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7040094

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sarapultseva, Maria, and Alexey Sarapultsev. 2019. "Flowable Bulk-Fill Materials Compared to Nano Ceramic Composites for Class I Cavities Restorations in Primary Molars: A Two-Year Prospective Case-Control Study" Dentistry Journal 7, no. 4: 94. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7040094

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop