Publicação: Pure Ormocer vs Methacrylate Composites on Posterior Teeth: A Double-blinded Randomized Clinical Trial
dc.contributor.author | Torres, C. R. G. [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Augusto, M. G. [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Mathias-Santamaria, I. F. [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Di Nicolo, R. [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.author | Borges, A. B. [UNESP] | |
dc.contributor.institution | Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-12-10T20:09:48Z | |
dc.date.available | 2020-12-10T20:09:48Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020-07-01 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of class II restorations made using pure ormocer and methacrylate composites in a period of 24 months, using a split-mouth double-blinded randomized design. Methods and Materials: Thirty patients received two class II restorations (n=60) performed with different composites: GrandioSO (methacrylate, nanohybrid) and Admira Fusion (pure ormocer, nanohybrid). The universal adhesive system (Futurabond M+) was applied in all restorations using the self-etching mode. The composites were placed by the incremental technique. The restorations were evaluated using the FDI World Dental Federation criteria after 7 days and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Results: After 24 months, 23 patients attended the recall and 46 restorations were evaluated. Fisher's statistical analysis (5%) showed no difference between the materials. One pure ormocer restoration and one methacrylate restoration presented small fractures. Only one tooth suffered a fracture of the remaining tooth structure. Admira Fusion presented, respectively, 100%, 95.66%, and 100% of acceptable performance in general scores for esthetic, functional, and biological properties. GrandioSO presented, respectively, 100%, 91.31%, and 95.66% of acceptable performance in the same scores. Conclusion: After 24-month follow-up, nonsignificant differences between the tested composites was detected. Both materials provided acceptable clinical performance in class II restorations. | en |
dc.description.affiliation | Sao Paulo State Univ, Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Restorat Dent, UNESP, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil | |
dc.description.affiliation | Sao Paulo State Univ, Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Social Dent & Pediat, UNESP, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil | |
dc.description.affiliationUnesp | Sao Paulo State Univ, Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Restorat Dent, UNESP, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil | |
dc.description.affiliationUnesp | Sao Paulo State Univ, Inst Sci & Technol, Dept Social Dent & Pediat, UNESP, Sao Jose Dos Campos, SP, Brazil | |
dc.format.extent | 359-367 | |
dc.identifier | http://dx.doi.org/10.2341/19-079-C | |
dc.identifier.citation | Operative Dentistry. Indianapolis: Operative Dentistry Inc, v. 45, n. 4, p. 359-367, 2020. | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.2341/19-079-C | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0361-7734 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/197215 | |
dc.identifier.wos | WOS:000562168900004 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.publisher | Operative Dentistry Inc | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Operative Dentistry | |
dc.source | Web of Science | |
dc.title | Pure Ormocer vs Methacrylate Composites on Posterior Teeth: A Double-blinded Randomized Clinical Trial | en |
dc.type | Artigo | |
dcterms.rightsHolder | Operative Dentistry Inc | |
dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
unesp.author.lattes | 3135367849609938[1] | |
unesp.author.orcid | 0000-0002-9485-5514[1] | |
unesp.campus | Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Instituto de Ciência e Tecnologia, São José dos Campos | pt |
unesp.department | Odontologia Restauradora - ICT | pt |
unesp.department | Odontologia Social e Clínica Infantil - ICT | pt |