Dental Restoration Wear
Conditions
Interventions
A 14-year retrospective, analytical observational study in which a group of 07 patients underwent a clinical evaluation of their dental restorations on composite resins, evaluating the following: colo
Procedure/surgery
I01.409.418.750.600.650
SP1.011.122
Sponsors
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Eligibility
Age
No minimum to 65 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Patients with indication of restoration in at least 3 posterior teeth; good oral hygiene condition; healthy or properly restored antagonistic teeth.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Have made any changes in the restorations, replacements, repairs, prostheses; loss of dental elements analyzed in the study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected Outcome 1: Satisfactory clinical performance of the restorations, after 14 years, verified using the USPHS (United State Public Healt Service) method, based on the observation of a variation of at least 5% in pre and post-intervention measurements, comparing 14-year clinical assessment compared to baseline.;Conclusion Found 1: It was observed that all the analyzed materials obtained a good clinical performance after 14 years. As for color reproducibility: score A (ideal) = 23.8%, B (acceptable) = 42.8%, C (unsatisfactory) = 28.57% and D (unsatisfactory) = 4.7%; discoloration of the superficial cavity margin: A score = 61.9%, B = 38.1%; caries recurrence: score A = 100%; wear and marginal integrity: score A = 9.5%, B = 80.9%, C = 9.5%. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Expected outcome 2: There would be statistically significant differences between the resins tested in the analyzed questions (color reproduction, marginal integrity, superficial cavo margin discoloration and loss of substance). From the observation of variation of the evaluations by at least 5%.;Conclusion 2: There were no statistically significant differences between the materials tested in this study (p> 0.281). - Color Playback: Filtek P60 (1 Alpha, 3 Bravo, 3 Charlie); Surefil (3 Alpha, 2 Bravo, 2 Charlie); Suprafill (1 Alpha, 4 Bravo, 1 Charlie, 1 Delta) = p = 0.958. - Discoloration of the Cavo Superficial Margin: Filtek P60 (3 Alpha, 4 Bravo); Surefil (5 Alpha, 2 Bravo; Suprafill (5 Alpha, 2 Bravo) = p = 0.281. - Presence of Caries: Filtek P60 (7 Alpha); Surefil (7 Alfa); Suprafill (7 Alfa) = p = 1.00. - Contour or Loss of Substance: Filtek P60 (6 Bravo, 1 Charlie); Surefil (7 Bravo); Suprafill (1 Alpha, 5 Bravo, 1 Charlie) = p = 0.746. | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactLuis Espíndola
Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Outcome results
None listed