Clinical evaluation of a new chemically-cured bulk-fill composite in posterior restorations: 6-month multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorLoguercio, Alessandro D.
dc.contributor.authorCarpio-Salvatierra, B
dc.contributor.authorÑaupari-Villasante, R
dc.contributor.authorWendlinger, M
dc.contributor.authorArmas-Vega, Ana
dc.contributor.authorCavagnaro, S
dc.contributor.authorLeón, A
dc.contributor.authorAliaga-Galvez, R
dc.contributor.authorGutiérrez, MF
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-27T06:26:50Z
dc.date.available2025-03-27T06:26:50Z
dc.date.issued2024-10-01
dc.descriptionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0300571224004159
dc.description.abstractObjective To evaluate the postoperative sensitivity (POS), as well as the clinical performance of posterior restorations using a new chemically-cured bulk-fill composite (Stela Automix and Stela Capsule, SDI) comparing with a light-cured bulk-fill composite after 6 months. Methods Fifty-five participants with at least three posterior teeth needing restoration were recruited. A total of 165 restorations were performed on Class I or Class II cavities. After the application of Stela primer, the chemically-cured composite (Stela Automix or Stela Capsule) was inserted. For the light-cured composite group, a universal adhesive (Scotchbond Universal) was applied with a bulk-fill composite (Filtek One). Participants were evaluated for spontaneous and stimulated POS in the baseline, after 48 h, 7 days, and 6 months. Additionally, each restoration was assessed using the updated version of FDI criteria after 6 months. The differences in the proportions of the groups were compared by Cochran test statistics (α = 0.05). Results Both chemically-cured composites showed a lower risk of POS compared to the light-cured composite at baseline and up to 48 h (p < 0.04). A significantly lower surface luster and texture was observed for the Stela Capsule composite compared to the light-cured bulk-fill composite (baseline and 6 months; p = 0.03). A significant color mismatch was observed for the light-cured bulk-fill composite compared to the chemically-cured composites (baseline and 6 months; p = 0.03). No significant differences were observed in any other item evaluations (p > 0.05). Conclusion Chemically-cured composites exhibit lower postoperative sensitivity and less color mismatch compared to a light-cured bulk-fill composite after 6 months of clinical service. Clinical significance The chemically-cured composites appear to be an appealing option for restoring posterior teeth, as they exhibit lower postoperative sensitivity compared to a light-cured bulk-fill composite, both at baseline and up to 48 h, and less color mismatch.
dc.identifier.issn0300-5712
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.uhemisferios.edu.ec/handle/123456789/2057
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherJOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
dc.relation.ispartofseriesV. 149
dc.titleClinical evaluation of a new chemically-cured bulk-fill composite in posterior restorations: 6-month multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial
dc.title.alternativeEvaluación clínica de un nuevo composite de relleno en bloque curado químicamente en restauraciones posteriores: ensayo clínico aleatorizado, doble ciego y multicéntrico de 6 meses
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Clinical evaluation of a new chemically-cured bulk-fill composite in posterior restorations_ 6-month multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial - ScienceDirect.pdf
Size:
273.1 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Artículos en revistas SCOPUS o ISI