33rd Global Summit on Oral Health and Dentistry
  • Follow

Accepted Abstracts

Clinical Evaluation of Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials for the Restoration of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: A Comparative Study

Akshita Rathi*
V.Y.W.S Dental College and Hospital, Amravati  India.

Citation: Rathi A (2022) Clinical Evaluation of Tooth-Colored Restorative Materials for the Restoration of Non-Carious Cervical Lesions: A Comparative Study. SciTech Central Dentistry 2022.

Received: September 26, 2022         Accepted: September 28, 2022         Published: September 28, 2022

Abstract

Aims and Objectives: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare clinically, the stability of three different tooth colored restorative materials in restoration of non-carious cervical lesions
Materials and Methods: Patients with non-carious cervical defects in maxillary and mandibular canine, premolar region from the outpatient department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics The sample size of total 45 non-carious cervical lesions (N=45) with age ranging from 22- 60 years who fulfill the inclusion criteria for the study. Baseline examination will be conducted under good illumination with the help of mouth mirror and Williams graduated probe. The patients will be evaluated at base line, 1months and 3 months after restoring the non-carious cervical lesions with three different tooth colored restorative material with the help of Modified USPHS (United State Public Health Service) rating scale. Restoration will be evaluated by operator for retention, secondary caries, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, and postoperative sensitivity of the restorations according to Modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.
Results: 1) The data was analysed, and Chi-square test was done (P = 0.05). 2) Descriptive and comparative evaluation was done using cross tabulation and Chi-square test. In the current study, all three materials i.e. Tetric-N-Flow (flowable composite), Equia (GIC) and Dyract (compomer) were equally effective in retention, secondary caries and post-operative sensitivity till 3 months. There was no difference in the result; these could be because in the present study post-operative follow up period to evaluate the parameters was limited to 3 months.
Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference between the three restorative materials i.e Tetric-N-Flow (flowable composite), Equia (GIC) and Dyract (compomer) in treatment of non-carious cervical lesions.
Keywords: Tetric-N-Flow (flowable composite), Equia (GIC) and Dyract (compomer), Non-carious cervical lesions