Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical evaluation of two materials in the restoration of abfraction lesions
Medeiros, Fabianna da Conceição Dantas de; Santos, Marquiony Marques; Araújo, Isaac Jordão de Souza; Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti.
Afiliação
  • Medeiros, Fabianna da Conceição Dantas de; Universidade Estadual do Rio Grande do Norte. Department of Dentistry. Caicó. BR
  • Santos, Marquiony Marques; Universidade Estadual do Rio Grande do Norte. Department of Dentistry. Caicó. BR
  • Araújo, Isaac Jordão de Souza; Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Campinas. BR
  • Lima, Isabela Pinheiro Cavalcanti; Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Campinas. BR
Braz. j. oral sci ; 14(4): 287-293, Oct.-Dec. 2015. tab
Article em En | LILACS, BBO | ID: lil-797250
Biblioteca responsável: BR218.1
ABSTRACT

Aim:

To evaluate the clinical performance of a composite resin (CR) and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) for the treatment of abfraction lesions.

Methods:

Thirty patients with abfraction lesions in at least two premolar teeth were selected and invited to participate in this study. All restorations were made within the same clinical time frame. One tooth was restored with CR Z100TM (3M, St. Paul, MN, USA), and the other was restored with RMGIC VitremerTM (3M). The restorations were assessed immediately and 1, 6 and 12 months after the restoration, using modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, wear, retention, secondary caries and hypersensitivity. The statistical analysis was based on Friedman ANOVA test and Mann-Whitney test, considering p<0.05 for statistical significance.

Results:

Both materials demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance after one year. In the individual analysis of each material, there was a significant difference (p<0.05) in the criteria marginal integrity and wear, for both CR and RMGIC. RMGIC exhibited more damage one year after the restoration. Comparing both materials, it was found a significant difference only for marginal discoloration, while the RMGIC restorations showed the worst prognosis after a year of evaluation. There was no significant difference in the number of retentions, caries or hypersensitivity between CR and RMGIC.

Conclusions:

It was concluded that CR exhibited the best clinical performance according to the cost-effectiveness and evaluation criteria used in this study.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: BBO / LILACS Assunto principal: Traumatismos Dentários / Resinas Compostas / Desgaste dos Dentes / Cimentos de Ionômeros de Vidro Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Braz. j. oral sci Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Brasil
Texto completo
Adicionar na Minha BVS
Imprimir
XML
Buscar no Google

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: BBO / LILACS Assunto principal: Traumatismos Dentários / Resinas Compostas / Desgaste dos Dentes / Cimentos de Ionômeros de Vidro Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: Braz. j. oral sci Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2015 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Brasil País de publicação: Brasil