| Popis: |
Objectives This multi-centre study aimed to establish whether a glass-hybrid restorative system has clinical outcomes comparable to a nano- hybrid resin composite 4-year after the restoration of moderate to large twosurface cavities. Methods The study had a longitudinal (4 years follow-up), multicentric (dental schools in Zagreb, Croatia ; Milan, Italy ; Izmir, Turkey, and Belgrade, Serbia), and split-mouth design. A total of 180 patients requiring two restorations on molar teeth in the same jaw were recruited in each centre and a total of 360 two- surface restorations were placed: each patient received a glass-hybrid restoration (EQUIA Forte, GC, Japan) and a resin composite restoration (Tetric EvoCeram, Ivoclar, Liechtenstein). Each restoration was independently evaluated by two clinicians at baseline, after one, two, three and four years. Aesthetic, functional, and biological performance was scored using FDI-2 criteria and compared using a nonparametric sign test. Survival curves for both materials were compared using the stratified test for matched pairs (p0.05). Regarding the performance of the restorations according to the FDI-2 criteria, there were no statistically significant differences between the materials for biological performance (overall biological performance excellent/very good scores EQUIA Forte 90.7%, Tetric EvoCeram 89.8%). The functional properties showed no statistically significant differences at 4- year recall (overall functional scores excellent/very good EQUIA Forte 58.3%, Tetric EvoCeram 55.6%). Regarding the aesthetic criteria, EQUIA Forte has shown significantly better performance p |
