Clinically controlled study on the quality of class III, IV and V composite restorations after two years.

Abstract

PURPOSE: The quality of fillings consisting of a hybrid composite was compared with fillings consisting of two different microfilled composites in a clinical examination. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Within the design of a clinically controlled two-year study conducted under practice-relevant conditions, the composites C-Fill MH (Megadenta), Helio Progress (Vivadent), and Visio-Dispers (ESPE) were examined in anterior-tooth cavities in 134 patients by means of the split-mouth technique. The clinical examinations were performed based on modified Ryge criteria (marginal integrity, anatomical form, secondary caries, color, marginal discoloration, surface roughness) after 12 and 24 months. RESULTS: Immediately following filling application, all evaluation criteria except color were assessed as level A. After 12 and 24 months, C-Fill MH was found to be significantly superior to the other materials with regard to marginal integrity, color, and marginal discoloration. CONCLUSION: The hybrid composite C-Fill MH seems to be superior to the microfilled composites and should therefore be preferred as a restorative filling material.