Clinical Performance of an Innovative Self-cure Bulk-Fill Composite Compared to Dual-Cure and Light-Cure Bulk-Fill Composite in Posterior Restorations.

Clinical Performance of an Innovative Self-cure Bulk-Fill Composite Compared to Dual-Cure and Light-Cure Bulk-Fill Composite in Posterior Restorations (A Randomized Controlled Trial)

This clinical trial aimed to compare the 1-year clinical performance of a self-cure bulk fill (Stela Capsules), a dual-cure bulk fill (Fill-Up), and a light-cure bulk fill (Tetric N-ceram bulk fill) in class II dental composite restorations

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Class II Dental Restorations
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Group II (n=20): were restored with dual-cure bulk-fill.; Other: Group III (n=20): were restored with light-cure bulk-fill.; Other: Group I (n=20): were restored with self-cure bulk-fill.

Detailed Description

A total of 60 direct class II restorations were divided into three groups: Group I (n=20): were restored with self-cure bulk-fill (Stela capsules) with Stela primer; Group II (n=20): were restored with dual-cure bulk-fill (Fill-up) with ParaBond adhesive system; Group III (n=20): were restored with light-cure bulk-fill (Tetric N-ceram bulk fill) with Tetric N-ceram universal adhesive. Each material was applied using its manufacturer-recommended self-etch adhesive protocol. All restorations were clinically evaluated after 1 week (baseline) and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months using the Revised FDI World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Comparisons of FDI criteria between the three groups and across different timepoints within each group were performed using Friedman and post-hoc Bonferroni tests. The significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 20
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Egypt
  • Alexandria, Egypt
    • Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• The presence of proximal caries on posterior teeth in a digital x-ray with a score of 2 to 4 according to the radiographic International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS).
• The antagonist and the adjacent tooth make contact.
• The teeth should have no signs of pulpitis.
• Patients with no periodontal disease
• No major systemic disorders or allergies

Exclusion Criteria:

- Extensive cavitated lesions, medical compromise, and traumatic malocclusion, bruxism, or parafunctional habits.

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
• Masking: Double

Number of Arms

3

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Group II: dual-cure bulk-fill (Fill-up) with ParaBond adhesive system	Other: Group II (n=20): were restored with dual-cure bulk-fill.; A total of 60 direct class II restorations were divided into three groups: Group II (n=20): were restored with dual-cure bulk-fill (Fill-up) with ParaBond adhesive system applied using its manufacturer-recommended self-etch adhesive protocol. All restorations were clinically evaluated after 1 week (baseline) and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months using the Revised FDI World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Comparisons of FDI criteria between the three groups and across different timepoints within each group were performed using Friedman and post-hoc Bonferroni tests. The significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.
Active Comparator: Group III: light-cure bulk-fill (Tetric N-ceram bulk fill) with Tetric N-ceram universal adhesive.	Other: Group III (n=20): were restored with light-cure bulk-fill.; A total of 60 direct class II restorations were divided into three groups: Group III (n=20): were restored with light-cure bulk-fill (Tetric N-ceram bulk fill) with Tetric N-ceram universal adhesive. Each material was applied using its manufacturer-recommended self-etch adhesive protocol. All restorations were clinically evaluated after 1 week (baseline) and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months using the Revised FDI World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Comparisons of FDI criteria between the three groups and across different timepoints within each group were performed using Friedman and post-hoc Bonferroni tests. The significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.
Active Comparator: Group I: self-cure bulk-fill (Stela capsules) with Stela primer	Other: Group I (n=20): were restored with self-cure bulk-fill.; A total of 60 direct class II restorations were divided into three groups: Group I (n=20): were restored with self-cure bulk-fill (Stela capsules) with Stela primer applied using its manufacturer-recommended self-etch adhesive protocol. All restorations were clinically evaluated after 1 week (baseline) and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months using the Revised FDI World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Comparisons of FDI criteria between the three groups and across different timepoints within each group were performed using Friedman and post-hoc Bonferroni tests. The significance level was set at p-value < 0.05.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
The functional properties of the examined restorations	All restorations were assessed clinically at 1 week (baseline) and subsequently at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, following the FDI evaluation criteria and scoring system, which indicates: Functional properties: (F1) Fracture of material and retention. (F2) Marginal adaptation. (F3) Proximal contact point. (F4) Form and contour. (F5) Occlusion and wear. Each evaluated property was scored according to the FDI criteria using the following clinical scores: Score 1: Clinically excellent/very good (VG), Score 2: Clinically good (CG), score 3: Clinically satisfactory (CS), score 4: Clinically unsatisfactory (CU), score 5: Clinically poor (PO).	1 year
The biological properties of the examined restorations	All restorations were assessed clinically at 1 week (baseline) and subsequently at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, following the revised FDI evaluation criteria and scoring system, which indicates: Biological properties (B1) Caries at restoration margins. (B2) Dental hard tissue defects at the restoration margin. (B3) Postoperative hypersensitivity and pulpal status. Each evaluated property was scored according to the FDI criteria using the following clinical scores: Score 1: Clinically excellent/very good (VG), Score 2: Clinically good (CG), Score 3: Clinically satisfactory (CS), Score 4: Clinically unsatisfactory (CU), Score 5: Clinically poor (PO).	1 year
The aesthetic properties of the examined restorations	All restorations were assessed clinically at 1 week (baseline) and subsequently at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, following the FDI evaluation criteria and scoring system, which indicates: Aesthetic properties: (A1) Surface luster and surface texture. (A2) Marginal staining. (A3) Color match. Each evaluated property was scored according to the FDI criteria using the following clinical scores: Score 1: Clinically excellent/very good (VG), Score 2: Clinically good (CG), Score 3: Clinically satisfactory (CS), Score 4: Clinically unsatisfactory (CU), Score 5: Clinically poor (PO).	1 year

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: Marwan Abdelnaser

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): February 1, 2025
• Primary Completion (Actual): February 10, 2026
• Study Completion (Actual): February 10, 2026

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: February 9, 2026
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 9, 2026
• First Posted (Actual): February 13, 2026

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): February 17, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: February 12, 2026
• Last Verified: February 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Other Study ID Numbers: 9264203

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No
• product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.: No