Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results

Area of Science:

• Dental Materials Science
• Clinical Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry

Background:

• Long-term clinical performance of light-cured posterior composite resins is crucial for restorative dentistry.
• Previous three-year results indicated the potential of these materials.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the five-year clinical performance and wear of six light-cured posterior composite resin materials for Class II restorations.
• To identify failure rates and reasons, and compare occlusal wear among different material types.

Main Methods:

• A five-year longitudinal study involving 247 Class II restorations placed by 24 dentists across seven clinics.
• Standardized clinical procedures and USPHS criteria were used for evaluation, with stone casts assessing occlusal wear via the Leinfelder method.

Main Results:

• After five years, 15% of restorations failed (27/176), with secondary caries being the most common cause.
• The intermediate material 'Fulfil' showed a significantly higher failure rate (Chi-Square, p < 0.05).
• Microfine materials (Heliomolar, Distalite) exhibited less wear than intermediate materials (Profile, Occlusin, P 30, Fulfil).

Conclusions:

• Clinically acceptable results can be achieved with posterior composite resins when applied correctly and maintained.
• Material selection is important, as wear characteristics and failure rates varied among the tested composite resins.
• Secondary caries remains a significant challenge in posterior composite restorations.