Comparative clinical evaluation between self-adhesive and conventional bulk-fill composites in class II cavities: A 1-year randomized controlled clinical study.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled clinical trial compared the clinical efficacy of self-adhesive bulk-fill Surefil One with a traditional bulk-fill composite in class II restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-four direct class II composite restorations were categorized into two groups. Group I, control group (n = 32): cavities were restored by Filtek One bulk-fill composite with Scotchbond Universal (SBU) adhesive in self-etch mode, Group II, test group (n = 32): cavities were restored by Surefil One self-adhesive bulk-fill composite. The study involved a follow-up period of 1 year, during which restorations were assessed at baseline (BL), 6 months, and 12 months using Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria. Data analysis was performed using nonparametric tests. A comparison of restoration characteristics was performed utilizing the chi-square test (X2). The significance level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: Filtek One and Surefil One bulk-fill composites revealed clinically acceptable FDI scores over 12-month recalls. Thirty-two patients (64 restorations) were available for all follow-up visits; 100% of the restorations survived. For esthetic properties, Filtek One was far better than Surefil One at all time points. However, in terms of functional and biological properties, both restorations demonstrated comparable performances. CONCLUSIONS: Filtek One bulk-fill restorations were superior in terms of surface luster, surface staining, color match, and translucency, but Surefil One restorations performed well and were similar to Filtek One restorations; however, additional advancements and research are needed to obtain better esthetics. Furthermore, longitudinal studies with extended follow-up periods are needed to assess the clinical potential of both materials. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Both Filtek One and Surefil One met the FDI criteria, with Filtek One demonstrating superior esthetic and functional qualities and similar performance regarding biological criteria. Both innovative restorative materials show potential for clinical use. Trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under registration number; NCT06120868:07/11/2023.

Assessment of the Micro-Tensile Bond Strength of a Novel Bioactive Dental Restorative Material (Surefil One).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to assess the micro-tensile bond strength and the mode of failure of a bioactive hybrid self-adhesive composite (Surefil one) under various dentin conditions. METHODS: Thirty-two extracted human molar teeth were used to test the micro-tensile bond strength of Surefil one under different dentine conditions (no treatment, 37% phosphoric acid etching, and universal adhesive) in comparison with a resin-modified glass ionomer (RIVA). All restorations were light cure-bonded onto flat dentine and then sectioned into beams. Then, fractured specimens were observed under a light microscope to evaluate the mode of failure. RESULTS: The Surefil one no-treatment group (NTG) exhibited the highest micro-tensile bond strength. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference observed between the Surefil one adhesive group (EAG) and the Surefil one acid etch group (EG). However, compared to other groups, the resin-modified glass ionomer (RIVA) produced the lowest results, which are statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Surefil one offers superior bond strength values when compared to resin-modified glass ionomers. Furthermore, Surefil one requires no dentin condition and has more straightforward clinical steps.

Commercially Available Fluoride-Releasing Restorative Materials: A Review and a Proposal for Classification.

Resin composite and glass ionomer cement (GIC) are the most commonly used dental materials to perform direct restorations. Both have specific characteristics that explain their popularity and their limits. More than 20 years ago, the first attempt (followed by others) to combine the advantages of these two families was performed with compomers, but it was not very successful. Recently, new formulations (also called 'smart materials') with claimed ion release properties have been proposed under different family names, but there are few studies on them and explanations of their chemistries. This comprehensive review aims to gather the compositions; the setting reactions; the mechanical, self-adhesive, and potential bulk-fill properties; and the ion release abilities of the large existing families of fluoride-releasing restorative materials and the new restorative materials to precisely describe their characteristics, their eventual bioactivities, and classify them for an improved understanding of these materials. Based on this work, the whole GIC family, including resin-modified and highly viscous formulations, was found to be bioactive. Cention N (Ivoclar Vivadent, AG, Schaan, Lietschentein) is the first commercially available bioactive resin composite.