Reliability of Class II Bulk-fill Composite Restorations With and Without Veneering: A Two-year Randomized Clinical Control Study

• DOI: 10.2341/19-290-c
• Publication Date: 2022-05-02T14:29:08Z
• Authors: D Kaisarly; M ElGezawi; R Haridy; A Elembaby; A Aldegheishem; R Alsheikh; KS Almulhim
• Keywords: Dental restoration; McNemar's test; Resin composite

Bulk-fill composites are increasingly used in stress-bearing areas posterior teeth, with a diversity of reports concerning their effectiveness and clinical reliability. The objective this randomized control study was to investigate the bulk-fill versus veneered Class II composite restorations. A double-blind split-mouth technique employed 80 subjects recruited for restoring caries one molar bilaterally same arch following respective inclusion exclusion criteria after obtaining written consent. While randomly restored using sealed-envelope technique, Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (TBF), contralateral an increment heavy-body microhybrid composite-Tetric-Ceram HB (TBF/V). Box-only cavities were prepared received etch-and-rinse adhesive bonding N-Bond treatment before insertion. Restorations assessed at 24 hours, 2 weeks, 6 months, 12 months esthetic, functional, biological quality employing FDI ranking criteria. Friedman repeated-measures analysis variance, McNemar test, Cohen's kappa statistical test analysis. Over 24-month interval, none restorations ranked as clinically unsatisfactory. In terms functional criteria, excellent significantly more prevalent TBF/V than TBF (p<0.05). For long-term satisfactory performance composites, occlusal veneering conventional heavy body appears be favorable.