Comparison of Two Universal Composites in Posterior Teeth

Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Double Blind Trial of Two Universal Composites in Posterior Teeth

The aim of this randomized, prospective clinical study was to compare the clinical performance of a universal light-curing, ultra-fine particle hybrid composite with a new version of this product produced by the same manufacturer in Class 1 and Class 2 lesions.

A total of 80 (13 Class 1 and 67 Class 2) lesions in 40 patients (21 females, 19 males) with ages ranging between 18-38 years (23.15±5.15) were either restored with Charisma or Charisma Classic (Heraeus Kulzer) in combination with an etch and rinse adhesive system (Gluma 2 Bond) under rubber dam isolation by two experienced operators according to the manufacturer's instructions. Two independent examiners, who were blinded to the composites used evaluated the restorations according to the FDI (World Dental Federation) criteria. Bite-wing radiographs and intraoral digital photographs were taken before and after treatment and at 6 months. The statistical analyses were carried out with McNemar, Pearson Chi-square and Cochran Q tests (p<0.05).

The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers. Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.

The surfaces were etched using 35% phosphoric acid for 30 s. The etched surfaces were rinsed and dried. Charisma classic was used in combination Gluma2 Bond etch&rinse adhesive. The composite resin restorations were light-cured (600 milliwatt/cm²). Occlusion was checked with thin articulating papers. Restoration surfaces were finished and polished with fine finishing diamond burs, stones and rubber cups.

Observers evaluated the esthetic properties of the restorations using FDI (World Dental Federation) Criteria.

"Surface luster"; "Staining (surface, margins)"; "Color match and translucency"; "Esthetic anatomical form"

The changes at restorations were obtained from baseline (one week after treatment), 6 month, 1, 2, 3 and 4 year.

Observers evaluated the functional properties of the restorations using FDI (World Dental Federation) Criteria.

The changes at restorations were obtained from baseline (one week after treatment), 6 month, 1, 2, 3 and 4 year.

Observers evaluated the biological properties of the restorations using FDI (World Dental Federation) Criteria.

The changes at restorations were obtained from baseline (one week after treatment), 6 month, 1, 2, 3 and 4 year.

Inclusion Criteria: a need for at least two but not more than four posterior tooth-colored restorations the presence of teeth to be restored in occlusion teeth that were symptomless and vital a normal periodontal status a good likelihood of recall availability. Exclusion Criteria: partly erupted teeth absence of adjacent and antagonist teeth poor periodontal status adverse medical history potential behavioral problems.

Gurgan S, Vural UK, Kutuk ZB, Cakir FY. Comparison of two universal composites in posterior teeth: preliminary report. J Dent Res (Spec Iss 94 B): 308, 2015

Gurgan S, Koc Vural U, Kutuk ZB, Cakir FY. Does a new formula have an input in the clinical success of posterior composite restorations? A chat study. Clin Oral Investig. 2021 Apr;25(4):1715-1727. doi: 10.1007/s00784-020-03472-5. Epub 2020 Aug 3.