Clinical performance of low-shrinkage giomer compared to nanohybrid resin composite in proximal restorations after one year: a randomized clinical trial.

IF 2.5 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Marwa I AbdelHafez, Omar Shaalan, Heba Hamza
{"title":"Clinical performance of low-shrinkage giomer compared to nanohybrid resin composite in proximal restorations after one year: a randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Marwa I AbdelHafez, Omar Shaalan, Heba Hamza","doi":"10.1038/s41405-026-00423-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The present study assesses the clinical performance and occlusal wear of low-shrinkage giomer and nanohybrid composite in proximal restorations.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fifty participants with proximal caries in posterior teeth (n = 25) were recruited. Teeth were restored with either conventional nano-hybrid composite (Filtek Z250XT, 3M ESPE, USA) or low-shrinkage giomer (Beautifil II LS, Shofu Inc, Japan). Clinical performance was assessed using revised FDI criteria at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Wear was assessed after 12 months by using 3D inspection and metrology software (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems, USA). FDI scores were analyzed using Chi‑square test for intergroup comparisons and Cochran's Q‑test for intragroup comparisons. Wear data were analyzed using independent t test for intergroup comparison and paired t test for intragroup comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the 12-month follow-up, both Beautifil II LS and Filtek Z250XT exhibited high clinical success rates, with 100% and 96% success rates, respectively. Beautifil II LS restorations had a 4% lower risk of failure compared to Filtek Z250XT (ARR = 4.0 (95% CI -12.6 to 19.5, P > 0.05)). The mean wear after 12 months was 0.036 ± 0.01 mm for Beautifil II LS and 0.038 ± 0.01 mm for Filtek Z250XT. The difference between groups was minimal (0.0026 mm; 95% CI: -0.0271 to 0.0324) and not statistically significant (P = 0.8178).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Low-shrinkage giomer showed satisfactory clinical performance and wear resistance compared to nanohybrid resin composite after one year. Both materials are considered clinically acceptable as per the American Dental Association (ADA) standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":36997,"journal":{"name":"BDJ Open","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13076630/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BDJ Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41405-026-00423-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The present study assesses the clinical performance and occlusal wear of low-shrinkage giomer and nanohybrid composite in proximal restorations.

Methods: Fifty participants with proximal caries in posterior teeth (n = 25) were recruited. Teeth were restored with either conventional nano-hybrid composite (Filtek Z250XT, 3M ESPE, USA) or low-shrinkage giomer (Beautifil II LS, Shofu Inc, Japan). Clinical performance was assessed using revised FDI criteria at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Wear was assessed after 12 months by using 3D inspection and metrology software (Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems, USA). FDI scores were analyzed using Chi‑square test for intergroup comparisons and Cochran's Q‑test for intragroup comparisons. Wear data were analyzed using independent t test for intergroup comparison and paired t test for intragroup comparisons.

Results: At the 12-month follow-up, both Beautifil II LS and Filtek Z250XT exhibited high clinical success rates, with 100% and 96% success rates, respectively. Beautifil II LS restorations had a 4% lower risk of failure compared to Filtek Z250XT (ARR = 4.0 (95% CI -12.6 to 19.5, P > 0.05)). The mean wear after 12 months was 0.036 ± 0.01 mm for Beautifil II LS and 0.038 ± 0.01 mm for Filtek Z250XT. The difference between groups was minimal (0.0026 mm; 95% CI: -0.0271 to 0.0324) and not statistically significant (P = 0.8178).

Conclusion: Low-shrinkage giomer showed satisfactory clinical performance and wear resistance compared to nanohybrid resin composite after one year. Both materials are considered clinically acceptable as per the American Dental Association (ADA) standards.

低收缩异构体与纳米复合树脂在近端修复一年后的临床表现:一项随机临床试验。
目的:评价低收缩异构体和纳米复合材料在近端修复中的临床表现和牙合磨损。方法:选取50例后牙近端龋患者(n = 25)。采用传统的纳米复合材料(Filtek Z250XT, 3M ESPE,美国)或低收缩聚合物(Beautifil II LS, Shofu Inc,日本)修复牙齿。在基线、6个月和12个月时,使用修订后的FDI标准评估临床表现。12个月后,使用3D检测和计量软件(Geomagic Control X; 3D Systems, USA)评估磨损情况。组间比较采用卡方检验,组内比较采用科克伦Q检验。组间比较采用独立t检验,组内比较采用配对t检验。结果:在12个月的随访中,Beautifil II LS和Filtek Z250XT的临床成功率均较高,分别为100%和96%。与Filtek Z250XT相比,Beautifil II LS修复体的失败风险降低了4% (ARR = 4.0 (95% CI -12.6至19.5,P < 0.05))。12个月后的平均磨损量,Beautifil II LS为0.036±0.01 mm, Filtek Z250XT为0.038±0.01 mm。组间差异极小(0.0026 mm; 95% CI: -0.0271 ~ 0.0324),无统计学意义(P = 0.8178)。结论:与纳米复合树脂相比,低收缩异构体在使用1年后表现出良好的临床性能和耐磨性。根据美国牙科协会(ADA)的标准,这两种材料都被认为是临床可接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BDJ Open
BDJ Open Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书