This study aimed to evaluate and compare two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class I post-endodontic restoration in molars. A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 25 for each group); group A: everX Posterior (packable composite) with a top layer of solareX (nano-hybrid composite) and group B: everX Flow (flowable composite) with a top layer of G-aenial universal injectable (flowable composite). Patients were evaluated immediately after the procedure (baseline), at 6 months, and at 1 year time intervals based on the modified USPHS criteria. The statistical analysis using a chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of group A and group B. Clinical performance of the combination of everX Flow with overlying G-aenial universal injectable composite proved to be comparable with everX Posterior with overlying solareX composite as post-endodontic restorations in class I lesions in permanent molars.
Comparative evaluation of two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class 1 post-endodontic restorations in molars—a randomized clinical study / Ranka, S., Rao, A.S., Shah, U., Solanki, D., Pawar, A.M., Reda, R., Zanza, A., Testarelli, L.. - In: MATERIALS. - ISSN 1996-1944. - 15:21(2022). [10.3390/ma15217858]
Comparative evaluation of two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class 1 post-endodontic restorations in molars—a randomized clinical study
Reda R.
Methodology
;Zanza A.Penultimo
Formal Analysis
;Testarelli L.Ultimo
Supervision
2022
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate and compare two different fiber-reinforced composite materials in class I post-endodontic restoration in molars. A total of 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups (n = 25 for each group); group A: everX Posterior (packable composite) with a top layer of solareX (nano-hybrid composite) and group B: everX Flow (flowable composite) with a top layer of G-aenial universal injectable (flowable composite). Patients were evaluated immediately after the procedure (baseline), at 6 months, and at 1 year time intervals based on the modified USPHS criteria. The statistical analysis using a chi-square test showed no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of group A and group B. Clinical performance of the combination of everX Flow with overlying G-aenial universal injectable composite proved to be comparable with everX Posterior with overlying solareX composite as post-endodontic restorations in class I lesions in permanent molars.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Ranka_Comparative Evaluation_2022.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
978.05 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
978.05 kB | Adobe PDF |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


