Search

Background: The present study was undertaken to evaluate the most suitable restorative for badly mutilated endodontically treated teeth. Aims: To evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of endodontically treated premolars restored with conventional nanohybrid, silorane composite with glass fibers and newer fiber-reinforced composite in mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities. Materials and Methods: Sixty extracted human maxillary premolars were selected. Fifteen intact teeth served as positive controls (Group 1). Endodontic therapy was done in the remaining 45 teeth. MOD cavities were prepared in all the teeth with standardized dimensions and were randomly divided into three groups (Group 2 - nanohybrid + glass fibers, Group 3 - silorane + glass fibers, and Group 4 - fiber-reinforced composite). Restorations were done for all groups. Fracture resistance was measured by Instron universal testing machine. Statistical Analysis Used: One-way anova test and Tukey's post hoc test. Results: Highest fracture resistance was shown by intact teeth group followed by fiber-reinforced composite, nanohybrid, and silorane, respectively. Statistically Significant difference was revealed by anova test (P < 0.0001) and Tukey's post hoc test (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Among the experimental groups, fiber-reinforced composite showed the highest fracture resistance. Statistically significant difference was observed for all the groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Comparative evaluation of EQUIA with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC; GC Gold Label glass ionomer light cured universal restorative cement) and a nanohybrid composite (Tetric N-Ceram) in noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Background: To establish the most suitable material for the restoration of NCCLs. Settings and Design: In vivo study. Materials and Methods: Eighty-seven NCCLs were randomly restored with EQUIA, a RMGIC, and a nanohybrid composite. Clinical evaluation of the restorations was done following the Unites States Public Health criteria by a single-blinded investigator. Data were formulated, and statistical analysis was done by Chi-square test. Statistical Analysis Used: Chi-square test. Results: No significant difference was found between EQUIA, RMGIC, and nanohybrid composite at 1-month, at 6 months, and at 1-year (P > 0.05). Conclusions: EQUIA, resin-modified glass ionomer, and nanohybrid composite performed equally at 1-month, 6 months, and 1-year follow-up periods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]