Clinical Observation Of Vertise Flow Self-adhering Flowable Composite In Wedge Shaped Defect Restoration

Objective: Our study is to compare the clinical outcomes of wedge shaped defect filling by using Vertise Flow(VF) self-adhering flowable composite and Filtek? Z350 Flowable Restorative(ZF) normal flowable composite after restoration for 3, 6 and 12 months.Methods: A total of 80 teeth among 36 patients, which was selected from the Department of Stomatology, the First Hospital affiliated to Dalian Medical University,was divided evenly into two groups. Experimental group was restored by VF while the ZF was used as control. The inclusion criteria required shallow defect of enamel or dentin, no apparent dental pulp symptoms or spontaneous pain history. The teeth should not have trauma or received restoration, periodontal or orthodontical therapy. All the wedge shaped defects were cavity prepared by modified method without base line:cavity wall was roughed by diamond bur and small enamel slope of cavity edge was made. The cavity was cleaned thoroughly by water and dried by air for 5 s. After sterilization, the dry cotton roll was used to protect from contamination. The experimental group was filled with VF according to the manufacturer’s instructions and cured by light for 20 s. Less than 2 mm was deposited for each step and the step was repeated until the defect was totally filled. The surface was polished by rubber cup. The control group was covered with Adper? Easy One before the ZF was introduced and the following steps were the same. After 3, 6 and 12 months, the restorations were assessed according to the modified Ryge criteria at 3, 6 and 12 months post restoration.Results: After 3 months, all the fillings were intact and marked as “alpha”. Nostatistical difference observed. After 6 months in the experimental group, one tooth had transparency problem, one had pit on restoration surface and one had roughed surface problem, which were all marked as “bravo”. As in the control group, one tooth had pit on restoration surface, two teeth had got margin crack, which were all marked as“bravo”. No statistical difference observed. After 12 months in experimental group, one more tooth got transparency problem, one more tooth had roughed surface, which were marked as “bravo”. In control group, one more tooth got margin crack, which was marked as “bravo”. Still there was no statistical difference.Conclusions: 1. There is no significant difference between the Vertise Flow self-adhering flowable composite and Filtek? Z350 Flowable Restorative in the restoration of wedge shaped defect after 3, 6 and 12 months.2. Vertise Flow self-adhering flowable composite is more convenient in clinical operation and may become an ideal choice for wedge shaped defect restoration.