Evaluation of Post- Operative Sensitivity of Nano Filled Composite Versus Bulk Filled Resin Composite in Posterior Class 2 Restoration: Post- Operative Sensitivity of Nano Filled Composite

Sadia Channa; Fozia  Rajput; Afreen  Bilgrami; Farhan  Javed; Hira  Faraz; . Madiha

doi:10.54393/pjhs.v4i04.645

Authors

Sadia Channa Department of Operative Dentistry, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan
Fozia Rajput Department of Operative Dentistry, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan
Afreen Bilgrami Department of Science of Dental Materials, Fatima Jinnah Dental College, Karachi, Pakistan
Farhan Javed Department of Periodontology, Avicenna Medical and Dental College, Lahore, Pakistan
Hira Faraz Department of Operative Dentistry, Dow Dental College, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan
. Madiha Department of Operative Dentistry, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences, Jamshoro, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54393/pjhs.v4i04.645

Keywords:

Post- Operative Sensitivity of Nano Filled Composite

Abstract

Dental composites use adhesives to adhere and are thermally non-conductive. Despite advances in restorative dentistry, adhesive restorations may cause postoperative pain and fail. Objective: To compare and evaluate the post-operative sensitivity between nano resin composite using incremental technique and bulk filled resin composite using bulk filled technique in class 2 posterior restorations by assessing the post-operative pain and sensitivity. Methods: Two hundred and twenty patients who satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria were lottery-divided into groups A and B. Nano resin composite was placed via incremental technique in Group A and bulk filled in Group B. Post-operative pain was assessed using Visual Analog Scale 0-10 at 24 hours and 7 days. Results: Male patients were 47 (42.7%) and 48 (43.6%), female patients were 63 (57.3%) and 62 (56.4%). Mean of pain was 2.39 ± 0.97 and 2.32 ± 0.81 at 24 hours postoperatively and 0.14 ± 0.63 and 0.00 at 7 days in group A and group B respectively. Pain level was mild in 97 (88.2%) and 105 (95.5%) patients, moderate in 13 (11.8%) and 5 (4.5%) after 24 hours, no pain in 105 (95.5%) and 110 (100.0%) and mild in 5 (4.5%) and 0 (0.0%) at 7 days in group A and group B, respectively. Conclusion: Bulk filled resin composite using bulk filled technique is more effective in class 2 posterior restorations as compared to nano resin composite using incremental technique

References

Sabbagh J, Fahd JC, McConnell RJ. Post-operative sensitivity and posterior composite resin restorations: a review. Dental Update. 2018 Mar; 45(3): 207-13. doi: 10.12968/denu.2018.45.3.207

Alomari Q, Omar R, Akpata E. Effect of LED curing modes on postoperative sensitivity after Class II resin composite restorations. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2007 Oct; 9(5): 477-81.

Anwer Bhatti U. The phenomenon of postoperative sensitivity and composite restorations - a review. Journal of the Pakistan Dental Association. 2019 Feb; 28(01): 33-40. doi: 10.25301/JPDA.281.33

Gupta R, Tomer AK, Kumari A, Mullick S, Dubey S. Bulkfill flowable composite resins-A review. International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences. 2017; 3(2): 38-40.

Monteiro GQDM, Montes MAJR, Rolim TV, Mota CCBDO, Kyotoku BDBC, Gomes ASL, et al. Alternative methods for determining shrinkage in restorative resin composites. Dental Material. 2011 Aug; 27(8): e176-85. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.014

Akarsu S and Karademir AS. Influence of bulk-fill composites, polimerization modes, and remaining dentin thickness on intrapulpal temperature rise. Biomed Research International. 2019 Dec; 2019: 1-7. doi: 10.1155/2019/4250284

Costa TR, Rezende M, Sakamoto A, Bittencourt B, Dalzochio P, Loguercio AD, et al. Influence of adhesive type and placement technique on postoperative sensitivity in posterior composite restorations. Operative Dentistry. 2017; 42(2): 143-54. doi: 10.2341/16-010-C

Reis AF, Vestphal M, AMARAL RC, Rodrigues JA, Roulet JF, Roscoe MG. Efficiency of polymerization of bulk-fill composite resins: a systematic review. Brazilian oral research. 2017 Aug; 31: 37-48. doi: 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0059

Par M, Repusic I, Skenderovic H, Klaric Sever E, Marovic D, et al. Real-time light transmittance monitoring for determining polymerization completeness of conventional and bulk fill dental composites. Operative Dentistry. 2018 Jan; 43(1): 19-31. doi: 10.2341/17-041-L

Dionysopoulos D, Tolidis K, Gerasimou P. Bulk fill composite resins. A novelty in resin-based restorative materials. ARC Journal of Dental Science. 2016; 1(2): 1-3. doi: 10.20431/2456-0030.0102001

De Matos JD, Nakano LJ, Lopes GD, Bottino MA, de Vasconcelos JE, de Jesus RH, et al. Characterization of Bulk-Fill resin composites in terms of physical, chemical, mechanical and optical properties and clinical behavior. International Journal of Odontostomatology. 2021; 15(1): 226-33. doi: 10.4067/S0718-381X2021000100226

Ragab H. Postoperative sensitivity and clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations in medium and deep cavities placed using two insertion techniques (two-years-randomized clinical study). Egyptian Dental Journal. 2018; 64(1): 753-65. doi: 10.21608/edj.2018.78087

Sabbagh J, Fahd JC, McConnell RJ. Post-operative sensitivity and posterior composite resin restorations: a review. Dental Update. 2018 Mar; 45(3): 207-13. doi: 10.12968/denu.2018.45.3.207

Porto IC. Post-operative sensitivity in direct resin composite restorations: clinical practice guidelines. International Journal of Development Research. 2012; 1: 1-2.

Akpata ES, Sadiq W. Post-operative sensitivity in glass-ionomer versus adhesive resin-lined posterior composites. American Journal of Dentistry. 2001 Feb; 14(1): 34-8.

Aboelenein AZ, Riad MI, Haridy MF. Effect of a self-etch adhesive containing nanobioglass on postoperative sensitivity of posterior composite restorations-a randomized trial. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2019 Jul; 7(14): 2313-30. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.585

Opdam NJ, Feilzer AJ, Roeters JJ, Smale I. Class I occlusal composite resin restorations: in vivo post-operative sensitivity, wall adaptation, and microleakage. American journal of dentistry. 1998 Oct; 11(5): 229-34.

Rosin M, Steffen H, Konschake C, Greese U, Teichmann D, Hartmann A, et al. One-year evaluation of an Ormocer restorative-a multipractice clinical trial. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2003 Mar; 7: 20-6. doi: 10.1007/s00784-002-0189-9

van Dijken JW and Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K. A two-year clinical evaluation of a new calcium aluminate cement in Class II cavities. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica. 2003 Jan; 61(4): 235-40. doi: 10.1080/00016350310004575

Efes BG, Dörter C, Gömec Y, Koray F. Two-year clinical evaluation of ormocer and nanofill composite with and without a flowable liner. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2006 Mar 1; 8(2): 119-26.

Poon EC, Smales RJ, YIP KH. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: results at 3.5 years. The Journal of the American Dental Association. 2005 Nov; 136(11): 1533-40. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0083

Sadeghi M, Lynch CD, Shahamat N. Eighteen‐month clinical evaluation of microhybrid, packable and nanofilled resin composites in Class I restorations. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2010 Jul; 37(7): 532-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02073.x

Wegehaupt F, Betke H, Solloch N, Musch U, Wiegand A, Attin T. Influence of cavity lining and remaining dentin thickness on the occurrence of postoperative hypersensitivity of composite restorations. Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2009 Mar 1; 11(2): 137-41.

Afifi SMH, Haridy MF, Farid MR. Evaluation of post-operative sensitivity of bulk fill resin composite versus nano resin composite: a randomized controlled clinical study. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences. 2019 Jul; 7(14): 2335-42. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.656

Asghar S, Ali A, Rashid S. Assessment of post-operative sensitivity in posterior resin-based composite restorations with two placement techniques. Journal of the Pakistan Dental Association. 2013 Apr; 22(2): 98-103.