الفهرس 
Title : One-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill resin composite using FDI criteria in comparison to conventional incremental posterior restoration
contentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 100 |  |  |
| | | from | 100 | | |
Abstract
Our study evaluated and compared the clinical performance and durability of Bulk fill composite versus conventional incremental posterior composite filling in class I posterior composite resin restorations bonded with self-etch adhesive strategies. Sixty-nine patients were randomly selected, their age range from 20 to 50 years old. They were divided into two main groups according to the packing technique of composite material; incremental Tetric Evoceram and Tetric Evoceram bulk fill composite. Sixty nine patients (n=69) were selected for incremental Tetric Evoceram composite restorations. 69 patients (n=69) were selected for Tetric Evoceram bulk fill composite restorations, resulting in a total of 138 restorations bonded with self-etch adhesive system in a split mouth technique. Clinical performance assessed at 6 months and 1 year using FDI criteria through visual inspection by two expert assessors. Our results revealed that in two groups; clinical performance of all restorations in the two groups showed clinically excellent / very good condition after 6 months. But after 12 months, regarding nano-hybrid incremental packing technique group; there was a statistically significant change in color match criteria after 12 months. There was a decrease in prevalence of excellent / very good condition and an increase in prevalence of clinically sufficient / satisfactory condition. As results showed a slight mismatch in color after 1 year within the normal range of the adjacent tooth structure. While in Bulk fill group, there was no statistically significant change in color match criteria after 12 months