Dental Materials
Volume 25, Issue 6 , Pages 750-759 , June 2009

Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: Clinical results and margin analysis after four years

  • Norbert Krämer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University Medical Center Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Germany
    • ,
  • Christian Reinelt

      Affiliations

    • Private Practice, Nuremberg, Germany
    • ,
  • Gert Richter

      Affiliations

    • Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, University Medical Center Carl Gustav Carus, Technical University Dresden, Germany
    • ,
  • Anselm Petschelt

      Affiliations

    • Dental Clinic 1 - Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Medical Center Erlangen, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Glückstrasse 11, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
    • ,
  • Roland Frankenberger

      Affiliations

    • Dental Clinic 1 - Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Medical Center Erlangen, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, Glückstrasse 11, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +49 9131 8533693 fax: +49 9131 8533603.

Received 2 July 2008 ,Revised 20 November 2008 ,Accepted 17 December 2008.

References 

  1. Manhart J, Garcia-Godoy F, Hickel R. Direct posterior restorations: clinical results and new developments. Dent Clin North Am. 2002;46:303–339
  2. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3:45–64
  3. Mjor IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997;55:58–63
  4. Van Meerbeek B, Peumans M, Verschueren M, Gladys S, Braem M, Lambrechts P, et al. Clinical status of ten dentin adhesive systems. J Dent Res. 1994;73:1690–1702
  5. Bergenholtz G. Evidence for bacterial causation of adverse pulpal responses in resin-based dental restorations. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2000;11:467–480
  6. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent. 2004;29:481–508
  7. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R. Three-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial of the posterior composite QuiXfil in class I and II cavities. Clin Oral Investig; in press.
  8. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater. 2005;21:864–881
  9. Tay FR, Frankenberger R, Krejci I, Bouillaguet S, Pashley DH, Carvalho RM, et al. Single-bottle adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. I. In vivo evidence. J Dent. 2004;32:611–621
  10. Baratieri LN, Ritter AV. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2001;13:50–57
  11. Efes BG, Dorter C, Gomec Y, Koray F. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner. J Adhes Dent. 2006;8:119–126
  12. Ernst CP, Brandenbusch M, Meyer G, Canbek K, Gottschalk F, Willershausen B. Two-year clinical performance of a nanofiller vs a fine-particle hybrid resin composite. Clin Oral Investig. 2006;10:119–125
  13. Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res. 1987;66:1636–1639
  14. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P, Braem M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res. 2005;84:118–132
  15. Krämer N, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R. Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part II. In vivo investigations. Am J Dent. 2005;18:75–81
  16. Krämer N, Taschner M, Lohbauer U, Petschelt A, Frankenberger R. Totally bonded ceramic inlays and onlays after eight years. J Adhes Dent. 2008;10:307–314
  17. Frankenberger R, Perdigao J, Rosa BT, Lopes M. No-bottle vs “multi-bottle” dentin adhesives—a microtensile bond strength and morphological study. Dent Mater. 2001;17:373–380
  18. Nikolaenko SA, Lohbauer U, Roggendorf M, Petschelt A, Dasch W, Frankenberger R. Influence of c-factor and layering technique on microtensile bond strength to dentin. Dent Mater. 2004;20:579–585
  19. Van Meerbeek B, Perdigao J, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent. 1998;26:1–20
  20. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas M, Vijay P, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28:215–235
  21. Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, D’Hoore W, Carvalho J, Qvist V. Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent. 2003;31:395–405
  22. Van Meerbeek B, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Peumans M. A randomized controlled study evaluating the effectiveness of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective phosphoric-acid etching of enamel. Dent Mater. 2005;21:375–383
  23. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P. Four-year water degradation of total-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res. 2003;82:136–140
  24. Frankenberger R, Tay FR. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005;21:397–412
  25. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Lohbauer U, Nikolaenko SA, Reich SM. Marginal integrity: is the clinical performance of bonded restorations predictable in vitro?. J Adhes Dent. 2007;9(Suppl. 1):107–116
  26. Dietschi D, De Soegenthal G, Neveu-Rosenstand L, Holz J. Influence of the restorative technique and new adhesives on the dentin marginal seal and adaptation of resin composite Class II restorations: an in vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int. 1995;26:717–727
  27. Frankenberger R, Strobel WO, Krämer N, Lohbauer U, Winterscheidt J, Winterscheidt B, et al. Evaluation of the fatigue behavior of the resin-dentin bond with the use of different methods. J Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater. 2003;67:712–721
  28. Frankenberger R, Strobel WO, Lohbauer U, Krämer N, Petschelt A. The effect of six years of water storage on resin composite bonding to human dentin. J Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater. 2004;69:25–32
  29. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding: effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent. 2000;25:324–330
  30. Dresch W, Volpato S, Gomes JC, Ribeiro NR, Reis A, Loguercio AD. Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled composite in posterior teeth: 12-month results. Oper Dent. 2006;31:409–417
  31. Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjör IA, Peters M, et al. Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Science Committee Project 2/98—FDI World Dental Federation study design (Part I) and criteria for evaluation (Part II) of direct and indirect restorations including onlays and partial crowns. J Adhes Dent. 2007;9(Suppl. 1):121–147
  32. Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Buonocore memorial lecture. Evaluation of clinical performance for posterior composite resins and dentin adhesives. Oper Dent. 1987;12:53–78
  33. Lohbauer U, Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Strength and fatigue performance versus filler fraction of different types of direct dental restoratives. J Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater. 2006;76:114–120
  34. Clelland NL, Pagnotto MP, Kerby RE, Seghi RR. Relative wear of flowable and highly filled composite. J Prosthet Dent. 2005;93:153–157
  35. Schwartz JI, Soderholm KJ. Effects of filler size, water, and alcohol on hardness and laboratory wear of dental composites. Acta Odontol Scand. 2004;62:102–106
  36. Turssi CP, De Moraes PB, Serra MC. Wear of dental resin composites: insights into underlying processes and assessment methods—a review. J Biomed Mater Res B: Appl Biomater. 2003;65:280–285
  37. Ferracane JL, Condon JR. In vitro evaluation of the marginal degradation of dental composites under simulated occlusal loading. Dent Mater. 1999;15:262–267
  38. Needleman I, Worthington H, Moher D, Schulz K, Altman DG. Improving the completeness and transparency of reports of randomized trials in oral health: the CONSORT statement. Am J Dent. 2008;21:7–12
  39. Abdalla AI, Davidson CL. Comparison of the marginal integrity of in vivo and in vitro Class II composite restorations. J Dent. 1993;21:158–162
  40. Krämer N, Garcia-Godoy F, Reinelt C, Frankenberger R. Clinical performance of posterior compomer restorations over 4 years. Am J Dent. 2006;19:61–66
  41. Frankenberger R, Garcia-Godoy F, Lohbauer U, Petschelt A, Krämer N. Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part I. In vitro investigations. Am J Dent. 2005;18:23–27
  42. Attar N. The effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of composite resin materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2007;8:27–35
  43. Jung M, Sehr K, Klimek J. Surface texture of four nanofilled and one hybrid composite after finishing. Oper Dent. 2007;32:45–52

PII: S0109-5641(08)00304-7

doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.12.003

Dental Materials
Volume 25, Issue 6 , Pages 750-759 , June 2009

Article Tools