Original scientific paper

Clinical Analysis of Compomer Restorations in Primary Dentition: 2-Year Evaluation

Negovetić Vranić Dubravka
Kristina Škrinjarić
Domagoj Glavina
Ilija Škrinjarić

Abstract

Various materials are available as alternatives to amalgam for restorations in primary teeth. The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical performance of two compomers: Hytac and Compoglass in class II restorations in primary teeth, as an alternative to amalgam. Seventynin second class cavities (60 patients) in primary molars were restored with amalgam (Vivadent/Ivoclar, Schaan, Liechtenstein, LOT 819798) (24 restorations), Compoglass (Vivadent/Ivoclar, Schaan, Liechtenstein LOT 819798) (24 restorations) and Hytac (3M Espe, Seefeld, Germany LOT 012) (26 restorations). Each material was placed by using the respective adhesive system in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. Restorations were evaluated immediately after placement and after 6 months, one year and two years by using modified USPHS (Ryge & Cvar) criteria. After two years colour evaluation rate A was recorded in 79% of cases with compomer restorations with Compoglass and 80% for compomer restorations with Hytac. Marginal adaptation for amalgam restorations was evaluated as rate A in 62.5%, rate B in 33.3% and rate D in 4.2%, while for compomer restorations with Compoglass rate A was recorded in 50%, rate B in 37.5% and rate D in 12.5%. Compomer restorations with Hytac were evaluated as rate A in 48%, rate B in 36% and rate D in 16%. Changes in marginal discoloration for amalgam restorations were evaluated as rate A in 79.2%, rate B in 16.7% and rate C in 4.2%. Compomer restorations with Compoglass were evaluated as rate A in 70.8%, rate B in 12.5% and rate C in 16.7%, while the results for compomer restorations with Hytac were rate A in 60%, rate B in 24% and rate C in 16% of cases. Statistical analysis was performed by means of nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests, which did not show statistically significant difference for the materials, according to the criteria used. Both evaluated compomer materials can be used as alternatives to amalgam restorations in clinical work. However, longer clinical testing is needed in order to obtain relevant results.

Keywords

amalgam restoration; compomer; Compoglass; Hytac; USPHS criteria

Hrčak ID:

9977

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/9977

Publication date:

15.1.2006.

Article data in other languages: croatian

Visits: 2.669 *