Effects of silane coupling treatment on the clinical performance of direct repaired resin-based composite (RBC) restorations with or without prior surface sandblasting: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects, of using silane coupling agent within the procedures of repairing old composite restorations with or without sandblasting their surfaces, on the clinical performance of repaired composite restorations. METHODS: The study involved repairing 130 Class I and II defective composite restorations. After recurrent caries removal, the repair process included etching with 37 % phosphoric acid, Adper Single Bond 2 application for bonding and Filtek Z250 composite for restoring all defects. The restoration surfaces were subjected to one of the following additional surface treatments within the repair process: Control: No additional treatment; the Silane-Adhesive treatment: A separate step involved the application of a silane coupling agent after acid etching; and the Sandblast-Silane-Adhesive treatment: included intra-oral sandblasting of old composite surfaces followed by silane application. Two calibrated examiners evaluated all repaired restorations according to a modified USPHS criteria after 6 months. Comparisons of the clinical performance between the treatment groups were made using Chi-square test, while responses to cold tests before and after repair treatment were made using Wilcoxon's Signed Rank's (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Of 130 cases, only 116 cases turned up for evaluation. The primary reasons for composite repair were recurrent caries and anatomical deficiencies. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups for all clinical criteria (p > 0.05). The control group experienced one total and two partial retention losses. CONCLUSIONS: The application of a silane coupling agent, with or without intra-oral sandblasting, demonstrated no improvement on the clinical performance of repaired posterior composites after 6-months. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Surface treatment of defective composite restorations using silane with intra-oral sandblasting within their repair process offered marginal improvement in their clinical performance over conventional etching technique, but insignificantly so. Repair reduced exaggerated cold test responses and eliminated POS within 6-months. Repair reduces cold sensitivity and promotes restoration longevity. This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with the registration number NCT06005571.

Postoperative sensitivity in posterior restorations restored with self-adhesive and conventional bulk-fill resin composites: A randomized clinical split-mouth trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the postoperative sensitivity (POS) of a self-adhesive bulk-fill resin composite with that of a conventional bulk-fill resin composite in posterior restorations. METHODS: Class I and II (n = 166) cavities of at least 3 mm depth, in 83 participants were restored by: (TEST: Surefil one™ Self-Adhesive bulk-fill (n = 83); and CONTROL: Filtek™ Bulk-Fill posterior composites (n = 83). The presence and intensity of POS associated with the restorations was evaluated at 24 h, 1 week and 1 month intervals using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Comparisons of POS presence between the two treatment groups were made using the Chi-square and Fisher exact tests, while Mann-Whitney and Friedman tests were used to compare the intensity of POS (α=0.05). RESULTS: Forty-two of participants (25.3%; 95% CI 19.3 to 32.4) reported presence of POS after 24 h and none of the participants reported POS after 1 month. The presence of POS was not significantly affected by the restorative material after 24 h, 1 week and 1 month (p>0.05). After 1 week, the participants in the Surefil one™ group reported significantly less intensity of POS than the participants in the Filtek™ Bulk-Fill group (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The use of Surefil one™ self-adhesive resin composite did not significantly increase the presence of POS compared to the use of the conventional bulk-fill resin composite. However, the intensity of POS was significantly less in the Surefil one ™ group after one week. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The use of a self-adhesive bulk-fill resin composite in posterior restorations did not increase the presence of POS more than the use of a conventional bulk-fill resin composite. However, it decreased the intensity of POS after one week. This clinical trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov; the registration number is NCT05567263.

Satisfaction with Dental Appearance and Attitude toward improving Dental Esthetics among Patients attending a Dental Teaching Center.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors influencing the satisfaction of dental appearance and attitude toward treatments to improve dental esthetics among patients attending a dental teaching center. METHODS: A questionnaire was used to collect data of four background variables among 450 patients attended a dental teaching center in the city of Irbid in Jordan. The questionnaire enclosed self-reported questions about the appearance of anterior teeth, received esthetic treatment and desired treatment for improving esthetics. Descriptive, multiple logistic regression and Chi-square tests were used for data analysis (p ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: The 450 participants consisted of (66.2%) male and (33.8%) female. Of these, 69.3% were satisfied with their dental appearance and 58.0% with the color of their teeth. Esthetic restorations were the most received treatment (39.8%) and whitening of teeth was the most desired treatment (55.3%). The patients' satisfaction with dental appearance was influenced by teeth color, crowding and receiving whitening (p < 0.05. r = 0.561, r(2) = 0.315). The most desired esthetic treatments influenced by the satisfaction with dental appearance were esthetic restorations and orthodontics (p < 0.05. r = 0.223, r(2) = 0.05). Significantly more female reported having esthetic restorations and orthodontics (p = 0.008, 0.000) and desired to have orthodontic, crowns or veneers and esthetic restorations (p = 0.000, 0.015, 0.028). CONCLUSION: Satisfaction with dental appearance was affected by teeth color, feeling teeth are crowded, desire for esthetic restorations and orthodontic treatment. A high percentage of patients were not satisfied with the color of their teeth. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Recognizing the factors that affect patients' satisfaction with their present dental appearance and attitude toward treatments to improve dental esthetic can guide clinicians to strategies to improve esthetics.

Assessing the irradiance delivered from light-curing units in private dental offices in Jordan.

BACKGROUND: The authors conducted a study to examine the irradiance from light-curing units (LCUs) used in dental offices in Jordan. METHODS: Two of the authors visited 295 private dental offices (15 percent) in Jordan and collected the following information about the LCUs: age, type (quartz-tungsten-halogen or light-emitting diode), date of last maintenance, type of maintenance, last date of use, number of times used during the day, availability of a radiometer, exposure time for each resin-based composite increment, size of light-curing tips and presence of resin-based composite on the tips. The authors used a radiometer to measure the irradiance from the LCUs. They used linear regression with stepwise correlation for the statistical analysis. The authors set the minimum acceptable irradiance at 300 milliwatts/square centimeter. RESULTS: The mean irradiance of the 295 LCUs examined was 361 mW/cm(2), and 136 LCUs (46.1 percent) delivered an irradiance of less than 300 mW/cm(2). The unit's age, type and presence of resin-based composite on the light-curing tips had a significant effect on the irradiance (P ≤ .001). CONCLUSIONS: Only 37 of the 141 quartz-tungsten-halogen units (26.2 percent) and 122 of the 154 light-emitting diode units (79.2 percent) delivered at least 300 mW/cm(2). Resin contamination on the light-curing tips had a significant effect on the irradiance delivered. The irradiance from the LCUs decreased with use. Practical Implications. The irradiance from many of the units in this study was less than 300 mW/cm(2), which may affect the quality of resin-based composite restorations. Dentists should monitor the performance of the LCUs in their offices weekly.