Mid-term clinical behavior of direct posterior restorations with different nano-filled resin-based materials: a retrospective evaluation

Abstract •Objectives: the aim of this study was to investigate mid-term clinical behaviour of different adhesive systems and different nano-filled resin-based materials in I and II Class cavities by collecting clinical criteria and micromorphologic scanning electron microscopy (SEM) assessment. •Materials and Methods: ninety composite restorations were longitudinally followed up (Tetric EvoCeram: n=26 ; Admira: n=26; Tetric PowerFill: n= 38) .Three different adhesive systems were used: Adhese Universal (Ivoclar Vivadent), ExciTE F (Ivoclar Vivadent), FuturaBond U (VOCO). Restorations were examined over time for up to eight years following SQUACE and FDI criteria. Epoxy replicas of restorations were analysed under a SEM at different magnification. The results were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier curves. •Results: all the materials tested showed a good clinical performance in a mid-term evaluation period. Even though Tetric Powerfill and ExciTE seemed to perform better, no statistically significant differences in clinical success were found between the three adhesives and the three composite resins, thus longevity of dental restorations seems to depend on different factors, not only related to materials, but also to the patient, and the dentist, as supported by other studies. •Conclusions: Tetric Powerfill and ExciTE restorations performed better in a seven-years follow up, even though all materials presented good survival rate. Micromorphologic images showed good correlation with clinical criteria.