Clinical oral investigations · 2025
The effect of contouring instruments on immediate quality and porosity of direct restorations.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Soler-Tornero Carlos, Toivonen Pekka, Suorsa Jaakko, Karhula Sakari S, Saarakkala Simo, Anttonen Vuokko, Leinonen Jukka
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The study aims to evaluate the effect of contouring instruments on the porosity and immediate quality of direct dental restorations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen human molars with 30 Class II and 10 Class V cavities were restored by five voluntary dentists using three contouring instruments (conventional steel, silicone-tipped and diamond-like carbon coated-instruments) and three filling materials (Admira Fusion, Filtek Supreme XTE and Fuji II LC). The restorations were evaluated for immediate quality, porosity and number of pores using stereomicroscope and micro-computed tomography. Statistical analysis included the Shapiro‒Wilk test for normality, one-way ANOVA with Holm‒Sidak post hoc test for normal data, Kruskal‒Wallis ANOVA and Dunn's test for non-normal data, and Fisher's exact test for restoration quality comparisons. Statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The proportion of restorations with acceptable immediate quality was higher for the restorations that had been contoured using a diamond-coated non-stick contouring instrument compared to the restorations that had been contoured using a conventional steel instrument (p = 0.033). The number of pores and porosity were similar for restorations that had been contoured with different contouring instruments. However, the number of pores and porosity were lowest in the restorations made of Filtek Supreme XTE followed by Admira Fusion and Fuji II LC.
CONCLUSION: The use of diamond-like carbon-coated contouring instruments increased the proportion of acceptable composite restorations compared to conventional steel instruments.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Non-stick contouring instruments should be considered for wider use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen human molars with 30 Class II and 10 Class V cavities were restored by five voluntary dentists using three contouring instruments (conventional steel, silicone-tipped and diamond-like carbon coated-instruments) and three filling materials (Admira Fusion, Filtek Supreme XTE and Fuji II LC). The restorations were evaluated for immediate quality, porosity and number of pores using stereomicroscope and micro-computed tomography. Statistical analysis included the Shapiro‒Wilk test for normality, one-way ANOVA with Holm‒Sidak post hoc test for normal data, Kruskal‒Wallis ANOVA and Dunn's test for non-normal data, and Fisher's exact test for restoration quality comparisons. Statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The proportion of restorations with acceptable immediate quality was higher for the restorations that had been contoured using a diamond-coated non-stick contouring instrument compared to the restorations that had been contoured using a conventional steel instrument (p = 0.033). The number of pores and porosity were similar for restorations that had been contoured with different contouring instruments. However, the number of pores and porosity were lowest in the restorations made of Filtek Supreme XTE followed by Admira Fusion and Fuji II LC.
CONCLUSION: The use of diamond-like carbon-coated contouring instruments increased the proportion of acceptable composite restorations compared to conventional steel instruments.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Non-stick contouring instruments should be considered for wider use.