Evaluation of Post-Operative Sensitivity of Bulk Fill Resin Composite versus Nano Resin Composite: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Sarah Mahmoud Hussien Afifi, Mohamed Fouad Haridy, Mohamed Riad Farid, Sarah Mahmoud Hussien Afifi, Mohamed Fouad Haridy, Mohamed Riad Farid

Abstract

Background: Despite recent advances in restorative dentistry adhesive restorations may cause postoperative sensitivity which leads to restoration failure.

Aim: This study aimed to compare and evaluate the incremental and bulk fill resin Composite postoperative sensitivity in class II posterior restorations bonded with two adhesive systems (self-etch and etch-and-rinse).

Methods: Sixty patients were randomly selected, their age range from twenty-five to forty years old, divided into two groups according to the packing technique of resin composite material; incremental Tetric Evoceram and Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite. Thirty patients (n = 30) for incremental Tetric Evoceram resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth).Thirty patients (n = 30) for Tetric Evoceram bulk-fill resin composite restorations and according to the adhesive systems used (etch and rinse or self-etch), they were equally divided (n = 15 teeth). Post-operative pain assessed at 24 hours, 1 week and 1 month using the Visual Analog Scale Score (VAS). Each patient was instructed to put a mark on the VAS line at home to point out the intensity of pain at each assessment period. The problem of measuring the pain that pain tolerance of individuals may be different from the others. This may be due to different reasons, and it is not always because of a problem in the restoration.

Results: After 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month, no statistically significant disagreement between the two resin composite types using self-etch adhesive strategy and total-etch adhesive strategy. Also, when the two adhesive systems were compared using Bulk Fill resin composite and incremental Nano resin composite no statistically significant disagreement between the two adhesive systems after 1 day, 1 week as well as 1 month.

Conclusion: The post-operative hypersensitivity is related to many factors as the procedure of cavity preparation, adhesive approach, and type of resin composite used and placement technique of the resin composite.

Keywords: Adhesive system; Bulk fill resin composite; Class II posterior restorations; Incremental Nano resin composite; Postoperative sensitivity.

Copyright: © 2019 Sarah Mahmoud Hussien Afifi, Mohamed Fouad Haridy, Mohamed Riad Farid.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Clinical Case 1. Arrows showing Cl. II (Mesial and distal surface) in upper 4 (top); Arrow showing prepared cavity after caries removal and excavation (middle); Tooth after Tetric Evoceram Bulk Fill resin composite placement and finishing (bottom)
Figure 2
Figure 2
Clinical case 2. Arrows showing Cl.II (Mesial surface) in left upper 4 (top); Arrow showing prepared cavity after caries removal and excavation (middle); Tooth after Tetric Evoceram universal nano-hybrid resin composite incremental (bottom)
Figure 3
Figure 3
Visual Analog Scale
Figure 4
Figure 4
Bar chart representing the prevalence of hypersensitivity after using the two composite types
Figure 5
Figure 5
Bar chart representing the prevalence of hypersensitivity after using the two adhesive systems
Figure 6
Figure 6
Line chart representing the prevalence of hypersensitivity at different follow up periods within each group

References

    1. Conte NR, Jr, Goodchild JH. Flowable composite resins:do they decrease micro leakage and shrinkage stress? Compendium of continuing education in dentistry Journal. 2013;34(6):1–7.
    1. Larson TD. The clinical significance and management of microleakage. Part one. Northwest dentistry. 2005;84(1):23–5.
    1. Poskus LT, Placido E, Cardoso PE. Influence of placement techniques on Vickers and Knoop hardness of class II composite resin restorations. Dental Materials. 2004;20(8):726–732. PMid:15302453.
    1. Czasch P, Ilie N. In vitro comparison of mechanical properties and degree of cure of bulk fill composites. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2013;17(1):227–235. PMid:22411261.
    1. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Carvalho RM, Rueggeberg FA, Agee KA, Carrilho M, Donnelly A, Garcı'a-Godoy F. From dry bonding to water-wet bonding to ethanol-wet bonding. A review of the interactions between dentin matrix and solvated resins using a macro model of the hybrid layer. American Journal of Dentistry. 2007;20(1):7–20.
    1. Carvalho RM, Chersoni S, Frankenberger R, Pashley DH, Prati C, Tay FR. A challenge to the conventional wisdom that simultaneous etching and resin infiltration always occurs in self-etch adhesives. Biomaterials. 2005;26(9):1035–42. PMid:15369692.
    1. Alomari Qasem, Omar Ridwaan, Akpata Enosakhare. Effect of LED Curing Modes on Postoperative Sensitivity After Class Resin Composite Restorations. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2007;9:477–481.
    1. Setia MS. Methodology series module 8:designing questionnaires and clinical record forms. Indian journal of dermatology. 2017;62(2):130–134. PMid:28400630 PMCid:PMC5363134.
    1. Arun A, Mythri H, Chachapan D. Pulp vitality tests-an overview on comparison of sensitivity and vitality. Indian Journal of Oral Sciences. 2015;6(2):41–46. .
    1. Celik C, Arhun N, Yamanel K. Clinical evaluation of resin-based composites in posterior restorations:12-month results Euroupe. Journal of Dentistry. 2010;4(1):57–65.
    1. Costa T, Rezende M, Sakamoto A, Bittencourt B, Dalzochio P, Loguercio AD, Reis A. Influence of Adhesive Type and Placement Technique on Postoperative Sensitivity in Posterior Composite Restorations. Operative Dentistry. 2017;42(2):143–154. PMid:27892839.
    1. De Melo Monteiro GQ, Montes MA, Rolim TV, de Oliveira Mota CC, de Barros Correia Kyotoku B, Gomes AS, de Freitas AZ. Alternative methods for determining shrinkage in restorative resin composites. Dental Materials. 2011;27(8):176–185. PMid:21612818.
    1. Yiu CK, García-Godoy F, Tay FR, Pashley DH, Imazato S, King NM, Lai SC. A nanoleakage perspective on bonding to oxidized dentin. Journal of Dental Research. 2002;81(9):628–632. PMid:12202645.
    1. Hirata R, Kabbach W, Andrade OS, Bonfante EA, Giannini Coelho PG. Bulks fill composites:An anatomic sculpting technique. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2015;27(6):335–343. PMid:26177219.
    1. Benetti AR, Havndrup-Pedersen C, Honore' D, Pedersen MK, Pallesen U. Bulk-fill resin composites:Polymerization contraction, depth of cure, and gap formation. Operative Dentistry. 2015;40(2):190–200. PMid:25216940.
    1. Bucuta S, Ilie N. Light transmittance and micromechanical properties of bulk fill vs. conventional resin based composites. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2014;18(8):1991–2000. PMid:24414570.
    1. Flury S, Hayoz S, Peutzfeldt A, Husler J, Lussi A Depth of cure of resin composites:Is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials? Dental Materials. 2012;28(5):521–528. PMid:22391146.
    1. Mobarak EH, Daifalla LE. Long-term nanoleakage depth and pattern of cervical restorations bonded with different adhesives. Operative Dentistry. 2012;37(1):45–53. PMid:21942238.
    1. Moosavi H, Kimyai S, Forghani M, Khodadadi R. The clinical effectiveness of various adhesive systems:an 18-month evaluation. Operative Dentistry. 2013;38(2):134–41. PMid:22917442.
    1. Meena N, Niharika Jain. Options for Dentin Bonding-Total Etch Or Self Etch? International Journal of Contemporary Dentistry. 2011;2(2):31–33.
    1. Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain:a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. Journal of clinical nursing. 2005;14(7):798–804. PMid:16000093.
    1. Sancakli HS, Yildiz E, Bayrak I, Ozel S. Effect of different adhesive strategies on the post-operative sensitivity of class I composite restorations. European Journal of Dental Education. 2014;8(1):15–22. PMid:24966741 PMCid:PMC4054027.
    1. Asghar S, Ali A, Rashid S. Assessment of post-operative sensitivity in posterior resin-based composite restorations with two placement techniques. Journal of Pakistan dental association. 2013;22(2):98–103.
    1. Reis A, Loguercio AD, Schroeder M, Luque-Martinez I, Masterson D, Cople Maia L. Does the adhesive strategy influence the post-operative sensitivity in adult patients with posterior resin composite restorations?A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dental Materials. 2015;31(9):1052–1067. PMid:26122377.
    1. Berkowitz G, Spielman H, Matthews A, Vena D, Craig R, Curro F, Thompson V. Postoperative hypersensitivity and its relationship to preparation variables in class I resin-based composite restorations:findings from the practitioners engaged in applied research and learning (PEARL) Network, Part 1. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry. 2013;34(3):e44–e52. .
    1. Browning WD, Blalock JS, Callan RS, Brackett WW, Schull GF, Davenport MB, Brackett MG. Postoperative sensitivity:a comparison of two bonding agents. Operative Dentistry. 2007;32(2):112–117. PMid:17427818.
    1. Blanchard P, Wong Y, Matthews AG, Vena D, Craig RG, Curro FA, &Thompson VP. Restoration variables and postoperative hypersensitivity in class I restorations:PEARL Network findings, Part 2. Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry. 2013;34(4):e62–e68.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever