article · BMC Oral Health
A randomised controlled clinical trial evaluated the two-year performance of partial indirect restorations placed on damaged vital teeth with at least two remaining walls. Patients received restorations milled using computer-aided design and manufacturing from either nano-hybrid composite resin blocks or ceramic lithium disilicate blocks. Blinded assessors reviewed the restorations at baseline, six months, one year, and two years using modified standard clinical criteria. While notable differences were observed between the two materials at the six-month mark regarding marginal integrity and marginal discolouration, these differences disappeared at the one-year and two-year evaluations. Ultimately, both materials demonstrated acceptable and successful clinical performance over the entire two-year monitoring period, confirming that the composite blocks match the reliability of lithium disilicate for this specific type of dental restoration.
Restoring heavily damaged teeth requires materials that can endure biting forces while preserving tooth health and appearance. By showing that computer-milled composite blocks perform just as well as standard ceramic blocks over two years, this work gives dental practitioners validated material choices for durable, tooth-preserving treatments.
This work directly informs clinical practice and dental procurement by demonstrating that commercially available CAD/CAM nano-hybrid composite blocks are as reliable as established lithium disilicate ceramics. The findings are applied and clinically tested, providing dental practitioners and healthcare organisations with evidence to support the use of composite milling blocks in restorative dental procedures.
AI-generated from the published abstract. Always read the original work before citing.
TRIAL DESIGN: This is a randomized, controlled, superiority, double-blinded, parallel-group, two-arms trial with an allocation ratio of 1:1. The aim of this trial was to compare the two-year clinical performance of partial indirect restorations fabricated from CAD/CAM nano-hybrid composite and ceramic lithium disilicate blocks using the modified USPHS criteria. METHODS: In two parallel groups (n = 50 restorations), fifty participants having mutilated vital teeth with a minimum of two remaining walls were randomly enrolled in this trial and received indirect restorations of either nano-hybrid composite resin blocks (Brilliant, Coltene, Switzerland) or Lithium Disilicate (IPS Emax CAD). The restorations were assessed using modified USPHS criteria by two independent blinded assessors at baseline, six months, one-year and two years follow-up visits. Categorical and ordinal data were presented as frequencies and percentages. Categorical data were analyzed using the chi-square test. Ordinal data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test for intergroup comparisons and Freidman's test followed by the Nemenyi post hoc test for intragroup comparisons. Numerical data were presented as mean and standard deviation values. They were analyzed for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Data were found to be normally distributed and were analyzed using the independent t-test. The significance level was set at p ≤ 0.05 within all tests. RESULTS: Forty-eight participants received the allocated intervention and completed the follow-up periods. There was a statistically significant difference between both tested materials for all USPHS criteria regarding Marginal integrity and Marginal discoloration at six-months Follow-up, but with no statistically significant difference at one- and two-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Both materials showed an acceptable, successful clinical performance along the two-years follow-up period. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The CAD/CAM nano-hybrid composite blocks are as reliable as Lithium disilicate for restoring mutilated vital teeth.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03847-6
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
