ABSTRACT
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the 12 month clinical
performances of two different posterior composites in Class I and Class II restorations.
Methods: Thirty-one patients (10 male, 21 female) were recruited into the study. A
total of 82 Class I and Class II cavities were restored with either a nanohybrid composite
(Grandio) or a low-shrinkage composite (Quixfil), using their self etch adhesives
(Futura Bond and Xeno III) according to manufacturers’ instructions. The restorations
were clinically evaluated 1 week after placement as baseline, and after 6 and 12 months
post-operatively using modified USPHS criteria by two previously calibrated operators.
Statistical analysis were performed using Pearson Chi-square and Fisher’s Exact Test
(P<.05).
Results: All patients attended the 12-month recall. Lack of retention was not observed
in any of the restorations. With respect to color match, marginal adaptation, secondary
caries and surface texture, no significant differences were found between two restorative
materials tested after 12 months (P>.05). None of the restorations had marginal discoloration
and anatomic form loss on the 12 month follow-up. Restorations did not exhibit post-operative
sensitivity at any evaluation period.
Conclusions: Clinical assessment of nanohybrid (Grandio) and low-shrinkage posterior
composite (Quixfil) exhibited good clinical results with predominating alpha scores
after 12 months. However; further evaluations are necessary for the long-term clinical
performance of these materials. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:57-65)
Key words
Clinical evaluation - Nanohybrid composites - Posterior composites
