CLINICAL PERFORMANCE OF AN ALKASITE BASED RESTORATIVE MATERIAL (A SPLIT MOUTH RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL) | ||||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 51, Volume 50, Issue 1, April 2025, Page 217-224 PDF (371.48 K) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2024.279575.1492 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Nada Ahmed El-Salamouny  1; Waleed Abd EL Meguid El Mahy2; Ahmed A. Holiel 3
| ||||
| 1BDS, 2012, Conservative Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt | ||||
| 2Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. | ||||
| 3Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Introduction: Cention N, a newly introduced alkasite restorative which incorporates unique reactive fillers. Its potential significance in restorative dentistry lies in its capability to decrease polymerization shrinkage and facilitate the remineralization of carious lesions. Aim of the study: Assessing the clinical effectiveness of Cention N, a novel alkasite bioactive restorative material, in comparison to a traditional bulk fill composite resin. Materials and Methods: A sample of 12 participants with two or more class I cavities, were assigned randomly to two research groups. One tooth underwent restoration with Cention N, while the counterpart tooth received treatment with Filtek Bulk Fill. The restorations were observed and evaluated utilizing the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria at baseline (one week), three, and six-month intervals. In this trial, postoperative sensitivity, recurrent caries, and marginal staining were evaluated. To compare between the groups, the chi-square test and the Monte Carlo correction were applied. Friedman's test was utilized to assess variations within each study group at each time interval as well as the differences between time intervals. A significance level of (P≤0.05) was adopted for each test. Results: Clinically acceptable FDI scores were recorded for every restoration, at each time interval, and for every criterion. No discernible difference (p≥0.05) in the clinical performance between the two research groups was observed at baseline or during the three- and six-month follow-up periods. Conclusion: In terms of clinical performance over the span of six months, both tested materials showed comparable results. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Cention N; class I cavity; bulk fill; FDI criteria; clinical performance | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 276 PDF Download: 301 |
||||
