Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study
Leinonen, Jukka; Vähänikkilä, Hannu; Luksepp, Remo; Anttonen, Vuokko (2024-09-30)
Springer
30.09.2024
Leinonen, J., Vähänikkilä, H., Luksepp, R. et al. Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Oral Invest 28, 558 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05965-z
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
© The Author(s) 2024. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
© The Author(s) 2024. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:oulu-202410016132
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:oulu-202410016132
Tiivistelmä
Abstract
Objective:
This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.
Materials and methods:
We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan–Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.
Results:
We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).
Conclusions:
The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.
Clinical relevance:
Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.
Objective:
This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.
Materials and methods:
We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan–Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.
Results:
We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).
Conclusions:
The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.
Clinical relevance:
Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.
Kokoelmat
- Avoin saatavuus [34579]
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/