36 Months’ Clinical Performance of Primary Incisors Restorations Depending on the Type of Restorative Technique Used: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Background: Depending on the stage of the disease and the child’s age, different types of interventions can be used to treat early childhood caries. As a result, there is not enough clinical evidence to show that one kind of restoration is better than another. The objective of this longitudinal stud...
Guardado en:
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | article |
Lenguaje: | EN |
Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/e975df7ea60348e291bea576560e190e |
Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
Sumario: | Background: Depending on the stage of the disease and the child’s age, different types of interventions can be used to treat early childhood caries. As a result, there is not enough clinical evidence to show that one kind of restoration is better than another. The objective of this longitudinal study was to compare the results of 36 months of clinical performance of primary incisors restorations using an incremental layering technique with the ceram.x<sup>®</sup> SphereTECTM nanoceramic composite (Dentsply) or a full coverage technique with transparent strip crowns (Frasaco GmbH) with the same composite in children with or without biological caries risk factors. Methods: 80 patients (females 42/52.5%) were included in the study. A total of 160 restorations were performed. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, according to modified Ryge criteria. Conclusion: Restorations with both techniques were clinically highly successful and showed similar clinical performance at postoperatively regardless of the presence of biological factors of caries risk. |
---|