Comparative clinical evaluation of different treatment approaches using a microfilled resin composite and a compomer in Class III cavities: two-year results

This study evaluated the 24-month clinical performance of a microfilled composite using a one-bottle bonding system and a compomer that uses one-bottle bonding systems, which include a non-rinse conditioner or 36% phosphoric acid gel in Class III cavities. Each patient received three restorations due to primary caries of the anterior teeth, resulting in a total of 96 restorations. Three types of restoration/adhesive combinations were used: a microfilled resin composite (Filtek A110) with a one-bottle bonding system (Single Bond); a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) (Dyract AP) with a filled one-bottle bonding system (Prime & Bond NT) using 36% phosphoric acid pretreatment and a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) (Dyract AP) with a filled one-bottle bonding system (Prime & Bond NT) using a non-rinse conditioner (NRC) and a self-priming pretreatment. At baseline and one- and two-year recalls, color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, caries, marginal adaptation and surface texture of the restorations were evaluated by two experienced, calibrated examiners using the modified Ryge criteria. After two years, one restoration from each group had a rating of Charlie (C) for both color match and marginal discoloration and needed to be replaced. Therefore, the failure rate was 3.6% (success rate: 96.4%) for each group at the end of two years. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences among the three groups in color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, marginal adaptation and surface texture after two years. Also, no statistically significant differences were determined for each group with respect to color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, marginal adaptation and surface texture at the end of two years.     

Dentin bonding vs. enamel bonding of composite restorations: a clinical evaluation

The effect of dentinal bonding of composite resins was compared with that of enamel bonding. Two operators placed 192 composite resin restorations using enamel bonding or dentinal bonding on the two types of resin chosen for the study. Patients were recalled at the end of one year and two years. The restorations were evaluated clinically in the following categories: color match, cavo-surface discoloration, anatomical form, marginal adaptation, and recurrent caries. It was concluded for the evaluations that dentin bonding is not as effective as enamel bonding in protecting the composite restoration against cavo-surface discoloration and deterioration in marginal adaptation.     

Two-year clinical evaluation of four polyacid-modified resin composites and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement in Class V lesions.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the clinical performances of four polyacid-modified resin composites (F2000, Dyract AP, Compoglass F, and Elan) and one resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer) in Class V abrasion/erosion lesions. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Twenty restorations of each of the five restorative materials were placed in noncarious cervical abrasion/erosion lesions by one dentist. No cavity preparation was attempted. All teeth were isolated with cotton rolls and gingival retraction cord. The materials were manipulated according to the manufacturer's instructions and placed with the help of cervical matrixes. Restorations were finished and polished immediately after the placement. Evaluations were performed at baseline and 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after placement for retention, color match, cavo-surface marginal discoloration, anatomic form, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, and postoperative sensitivity. RESULTS: Retention levels at 2 years were 90% for F2000, 90% for Dyract AP, 89% for Compoglass F, 84% for Elan, and 95% for the Vitremer restorations. No statistically significant differences were found among the materials after 2 years for any evaluation category. CONCLUSION: Polyacid-modified resin composite and resin-modified glass-ionomer cement restorations showed acceptable clinical performance after 2 years.     

Three-year clinical evaluation of a resin modified glass-ionomer cement and a composite resin in non-carious class V lesions

The purpose of this study was a 3-year clinical evaluation of a resin modified glass-ionomer and a composite resin restorative material in non-carious class V lesions. In 24 patients 98 non-carious class V lesions were restored with either a resin modified glass-ionomer (Vitremer), or a composite resin restoration (Z100). The restorations were clinically evaluated after 6, 12, 24 and 36 months with the US Public Health Service criteria. At 3 years, 88 teeth of 21 patients were evaluated. All restorations were rated clinically acceptable for colour match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation and anatomical form. Restoration retention of both groups was high without any statistically significant difference. However, Vitremer restorations showed a lower incidence of Alfa scores for colour match and marginal discoloration than Z100 restorations (P < 0.05).     

Clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer and two polyacid-modified resin composites in cervical lesions restorations: 1-year follow-up

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Vitremer) and two polyacid-modified resin composites (F2000 and Freedom) over 1 year. Nineteen patients with at least three cervical lesions were selected, providing an initial sample size of 87 restorations (29 per material), being 78 to non-carious and nine to carious lesions. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6 months and 1 year after placement, using modified US Public Health Service criteria: colour match, marginal discoloration, caries, anatomical form, marginal integrity and surface texture. At baseline, restorations were considered as acceptable for all criteria. At 1-year recall, 21 restorations per material were re-examined. Freedom was rated Bravo or Charlie for all the examined criteria and Vitremer earned an Alfa rating solely for the criterion caries. On the contrary, F2000 showed the best overall results, although presenting significant alteration in colour match. Statistical analysis of data was performed using chi-square and Mc Nemar tests. As to the evaluated periods, significant difference was observed solely between baseline and 1-year recall. Freedom and Vitremer were statistically different (P < 0.01) as to anatomical form and surface texture. For F2000, significant difference (P < 0.05) was noticed as to colour match and anatomical form. After 1-year follow-up, F2000 showed the most acceptable results as to the analysed criteria.     

Clinical Evaluation of a Nanohybrid and a Flowable Resin Composite in Non-carious Cervical Lesions: 24-Month Results

Purpose: To evaluate the 24-month clinical performance of cervical restorations using a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite with a one-step self-etching adhesive. Materials and Methods: Twenty-one patients with at least one pair of non-carious cervical lesions participated in this study. A total of 134 non-carious cervical lesions were restored (67 with a nanohybrid resin composite, Grandio; 67 with a flowable resin composite, Grandio Flow) using a one-step self-etching adhesive system, Futura Bond NR, by one dentist. The restorations were evaluated for retention, color match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, surface texture, anatomic form, and secondary caries by two calibrated examiners at baseline and after 6, 12, and 24 months using modified USPHS criteria. The survival rates of the restorations were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier estimator. The comparison of resin composites for each category was performed with the Pearson chi-square test, and the performance of restorations at baseline and after each recall time was evaluated using McNemar's test (p < 0.05). Results: All patients attended the 24-month recall. The retention rates at 6 months were 66% and 58%, and 61% and 57% at 12 months for Grandio and Grandio Flow, respectively. At the 24-month recall, the retention rate was 60% for Grandio and 54% for Grandio Flow. No statistically significant differences were found in retention rates among the restorative materials in any evaluation period (p > 0.05). For marginal discoloration and anatomical form, three Grandio and three Grandio Flow restorations showed Bravo scores at the end of 24 months. The restorations in both groups had Alfa ratings of 100% for the rest of the criteria evaluated. Conclusion: The nanohybrid and flowable resin composites showed similar clinical performances in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions over 24 months.     

Clinical evaluation of different posterior resin composite materials: a 7-year report.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical performance of 120 posterior composite restorations placed in 38 patients after a period of 7 years. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Eighty-eight Class I and 32 Class II restorations were made (93 molars and 27 premolars) using three different resin composite materials: Z100, Clearfil Ray-Posterior, and Prisma TPH. The restorations were evaluated using Ryge's criteria for color match, marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, secondary caries, surface texture, and anatomic form at baseline, 1,2, 5, and 7 years. Photographs and radiographs were taken at each recall period. RESULTS: At 7-year recalls, 70 restorations were available for examination. Four restorations had failed due to secondary caries. Saliva sampling was performed to determine the level of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli for the four failed restorations at the last recall. No statistically significant differences were found among the materials in regard to color match, anatomic form, and secondary caries. Clearfil Ray-Posterior had statistically significantly rougher surface texture than the surrounding enamel compared to the other resin composites. Z100 showed more cavosurface margin discoloration after 5 years than the other two resin composites. All materials had slight marginal adaptation problems at the 7-year recall. There was no apparent relationship between the levels of mutans streptococci and lactobacilli in saliva and the failed restorations. CONCLUSION: The three posterior composites tested had acceptable clinical performance after 7 years.     

Secondary caries formation in vitro around glass ionomer-lined amalgam and composite restorations

SUMMARY The aim of this in vitro secondary caries study was to examine the glass-ionomer liner's effect on wall-lesion inhibition when a conventional and a light-cured glass ionomer liner was placed under amalgam and composite resin restorations. Class V preparations in extracted upper premolars were used and ten restorations were used for each of the following groups: (i) two layers of copal varnish and amalgam; (ii) conventional glass-ionomer and amalgam; (iii) light-cured glass-ionomer and amalgam; (iv) bonding agent and light-cured composite resin; (v) conventional glass-ionomer, bonding agent and light-cured composite resin; (vi) light-cured glass-ionomer, extended 0.3 mm short of the enamel margin bonding agent and light-cured composite resin; and (vii) light-cured glass-ionomer, extended 1 mm short of the enamel margin, bonding agent and light-cured composite resin. The teeth were thermocycled and artificial caries were created using an acid-gel. The results of this study showed that artificial recurrent caries can be reduced significantly ( P < 0.05) with a glass-ionomer liner under amalgam restorations. The results also showed that when the light-cured glass-ionomer liner was placed 0.3 mm from the cavo-surface margin under composite resin restoration, the artificial recurrent caries reduced significantly ( P < 0.05).     

Clinical evaluation of two one-bottle dentin adhesives at three years

BACKGROUND: The method currently used to adhere resin to dentin involves etching, priming and bonding. Many commercial adhesives now combine priming and bonding functions in a single solution, and these are frequently called one-bottle adhesives. The purpose of this study was to compare the 36-month clinical performance of two commercial one-bottle adhesives. METHODS: The authors enrolled 33 patients with noncarious cervical lesions in the study. A total of 101 lesions were restored with either a filled, ethanol-based adhesive (OptiBond Solo, SDS Kerr) or an unfilled, acetone-based adhesive (Prime & Bond 2.1, Dentsply Caulk) and a hybrid resin-based composite. Enamel margins were not beveled, and no mechanical retention was placed. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and six months, 18 months and 36 months after placement using modified Cvar/Ryge criteria. RESULTS: The retention rates at 36 months were 93.3 percent for the ethanol-based adhesive and 89.4 percent for the acetone-based adhesive. The difference in retention rates was not statistically significant. In both groups, 12 percent of the retained restorations had marginal staining, but no recurrent caries was detected around any restoration. Other restoration characteristics such as marginal adaptation and color match remained excellent three years after placement. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of both adhesives was excellent during this 36-month clinical trial. At the most recent recall evaluation (that is, 36 months), the filled, ethanol-based adhesive exhibited slightly better bond durability, but the difference between the two materials was not statistically significant. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The one-bottle adhesives evaluated in this study provided excellent clinical retention of Class V restorations without mechanical retention. When the materials are used properly, restorations are retained at a high rate during at least three years of clinical service.     

Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the two year clinical performance of posterior composite restorations in endodontically treated premolars and molars using a hybrid composite (Filtek Z-250, 3M ESPE) and a total etch bonding system (Single Bond, 3M ESPE). METHOD AND MATERIALS: Thirty-nine class II restorations in endodontically treated premolars (n=11) and molars (n=28) of 27 patients (14 female, 13 male, mean age 36.51) in 16 maxillar and 23 mandibular teeth were placed by one operator. Restorations were evaluated by two experienced investigators at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria that included retention, color match, marginal discoloration, secondary caries, anatomic form, marginal adaptation, and surface texture. All restorations were able to be evaluated at baseline, 12 months, and 24 months. RESULTS: Paired samples t-test showed only marginal discoloration showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.05) at the end of 24 months, and no other significant differences were observed for the other variables examined over the duration of the study. None of the restored teeth showed periapical pathology at the end of 24 months. CONCLUSION: At two years, limited deterioration in marginal discoloration was detected. The clinical performance of posterior composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth using Filtek Z250 was found clinically acceptable after two years.     

Clinical evaluation of indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays over a 24-month period

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of ceramic and indirect resin composite onlays over a 24-month period. A total of 94 onlay restorations in 47 patients were included in this study. Cavities were prepared, full-arch impressions were taken, and onlays were fabricated in the laboratory. All restorations were placed with a dual-cured luting resin composite system. Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Differences between Alpha scores were analyzed statistically. The recall rate of this study was 93.6%. At the six-month evaluation, one onlay failed due to pulpitis. Other than the color match, there was no significant difference between indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays (p > 0.05). For indirect resin composites, Alpha score differences pertaining to color match, marginal adaptation, and surface texture were found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05) between the baseline and the 24-month recall. For ceramic restorations, marginal adaptation criteria was the only significant difference over the 24-month period (p < 0.05). At the end of 24 months, both indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays were considered to be successful clinically.     

Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class III cavities: three-year results

This study evaluated the three-year clinical performance of a polyacid-modified resin composite material, Dyract (DeTrey/Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany), in Class III cavities. Sixty-two Class III cavities in 30 patients were restored with Dyract. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, one-, two- and three-year recalls according to the modified Ryge criteria by two experienced, calibrated examiners. After three years, the retention rate was 96.7%. At the one-year interval, one restoration had to be replaced due to sensitivity. At the two-year recall, one restoration, with a caries lesion adjacent to its margin, was clinically unacceptable and had to be replaced. Except for these two restorations, all other restorations were clinically acceptable in regard to color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, caries, marginal adaptation and surface texture after three years. At the end of three years, marginal discoloration was statistically significant (p=0.017) but did not require replacement of any of the restorations. Dyract exhibited significant marginal discoloration after three-year clinical performance in Class III cavities.     

Two-year clinical evaluation of resinous restorative systems in non-carious cervical lesions

This controlled clinical trial evaluated the 2-year clinical performance of a one-bottle etch-and-rinse adhesive and resin composite system (Excite/Tetric Ceram) compared to a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (Vitremer/3M) in non-carious cervical lesions. Seventy cervical restorations (35 resin composite - RC- restorations and 35 RMGIC restorations) were placed by a single operator in 30 patients under rubber dam isolation without mechanical preparation. All restorations were evaluated blindly by 2 independent examiners using the modified USPHS criteria at baseline, and after 6, 12 and 24 months. Data were analyzed statistically by Fisher's exact and McNemar tests. After 2 years, 59 out of 70 restorations were evaluated. As much as 78.8% retention rate was recorded for RC restorations, while 100% retention was obtained for RMGIC restorations. Fisher's exact test showed significant differences (p=0.011) for retention. However, there were no significant differences for marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, anatomic form and secondary caries between the RC and RMGIC restorations. The McNemar test detected significant differences for Excite/TC between baseline and the 2-year recall for retention (p=0.02), marginal integrity (p=0.002) and anatomic form (p=0.04). Therefore, the one-bottle etch-and-rinse bonding system/resin composite showed an inferior clinical performance compared to the RMGIC.     

Clinical evaluation of 2 flowable composites.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of 2 flowable resin composites used to restore occlusal carious lesions. Tetric Flow (Vivadent) and Esthet-X Flow (Dentsply/Caulk) are resin composites with decreased filler loading and lower viscosity compared to conventional resin composites. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Sixty occlusal restorations (30 of each material) were placed. After tooth preparation and caries removal, each material was inserted with rubber dam isolation. Prime & Bond NT (Dentsply/Caulk) was used to bond both flowable composites, which were incrementally placed and light-cured for 20 seconds. Each restoration was evaluated at baseline (1 week after restoration placement), 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year for marginal discoloration, secondary caries, anatomic form, retention, polishability, marginal adaptation, and color match. Groups were compared at 1 year and the data analyzed statistically with a .05 level of significance. RESULTS: A marginally significant difference in color match was observed at 1 year (favoring Esthet-X Flow). No other differences were observed between materials. Marginal discoloration significantly worsened for all restorations at 6 months and 1 year, and marginal adaptation significantly worsened at 1 year for all restorations. A positive association between preparation size and sensitivity was detected at 3 months; no association was found at 6 months and 1 year. At 1 year, restoration size was positively associated with marginal adaptation. Despite some changes from baseline, all restorations were clinically acceptable at 1 year. CONCLUSION: Although flowable resin composites are advocated for occlusal restorations, it is recommended that they be limited to small and moderate-sized restorations.     

Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract) in class V carious lesions: 5-year results

This study evaluated the 5-year clinical performance of polyacid-modified resin composite, Dyract (DeTrey/Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany), restorations in class V carious lesions. Ninety-two class V carious lesions in 28 patients were restored with Dyract. Restorations were clinically evaluated at baseline, 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year recalls and were evaluated according to the modified Ryge criteria by two experienced calibrated examiners in regard to color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, caries, marginal adaptation, and surface texture. The retention rate after 5 years compared to baseline in class V carious restorations was 84%, with only 12 restorations failing. Color change and marginal discoloration in restorations were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.0238 and p < 0.0001, respectively) at the end of the 5 years, but did not require replacement of any of the restorations. The results of this study revealed that at the end of 5 years, Dyract exhibited a clinically acceptable success rate but had significant color changes and marginal discoloration in class V carious lesions.     

Retentive strength, disintegration, and marginal quality of luting cements.

This study evaluated the retention of complete crowns by using five different methods of cementation. Complete crowns were prepared with standardized dimensions on extracted human molars. Metal crowns were cast with a high noble gold ceramic alloy and were cemented with zinc phosphate cement, glass ionomer cement, composite resin cement, composite resin cement with a dentinal bonding agent, and adhesive resin cement. The retention was measured by subjecting the specimens to tensile load until fracture occurred. The disintegration was measured according to American Dental Association Specification No. 8, and the condition of the cements at the margins of crowns was analyzed by use of a scanning electron microscope. Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance revealed statistically significant differences between the mean retentive strengths. The retention of the zinc phosphate and the glass ionomer groups was significantly different from that of the adhesive resin group. The retention of the adhesive resin cement was 65% greater than the retention of the composite resin and the composite resin/dentinal bonding agent group, but the Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon rank sum test did not depict this difference as significant. The mean +/- SD of the disintegration for the zinc phosphate, the glass ionomer cement, and the composite resin cement was 0.025 +/- 0.013, 0.023 +/- 0.011, and 0.017 +/- 0.001, respectively. The scanning electron microscope analysis of the margins revealed that the composite resin cement was almost intact, the zinc phosphate was subjected to limited disintegration, and the glass ionomer displayed the worst marginal integrity.     

Four-year in vivo evaluation of the composite/bonding resin-tooth interface

The objective of this study was to evaluate the color match, marginal discoloration, recurrent caries, anatomic form, and marginal adaptation of 41 paired Class III and Class V preparations restored with a conventional chemically cured resin composite with and without a low-viscosity bonding resin (LVBR). In addition, the wear of the restorations was evaluated from scanning electron micrographs of epoxy replicas of the restorations. The subjects were re-called 48 months after placement of the restorations. The marginal discoloration and wear of the composite restorations placed without a LVBR were significantly greater than in restorations placed with a LVBR. The results of this clinical study suggest that a LVBR should be applied prior to the placement of a conventional chemical-activated resin composite.     

Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (Dyract AP) in Class I cavities: 3-year results

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the 3-year clinical performance of the polyacid-modified resin composite Dyract AP in restorations for Class I carious lesions. METHODS: 108 Class I cavities in 21 subjects were restored with Dyract AP. The lesions, which were diagnosed macroscopically with a probe, involved fissures and had reached the dentin, while lateral spread was limited and localized to the dentin. The average facio-lingual width of the cavities was equal to or less than one-third the intercuspal width. Restorations were evaluated clinically by two experienced, calibrated examiners at baseline and at 1, 2, and 3 years, according to the modified Ryge criteria, (color match, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, caries, marginal adaptation, and surface texture). RESULTS: None of the restorations failed at the end of the first year. At 2 years, two restorations required immediate replacement due to caries lesions adjacent to the margins. At 3 years, six restorations had caries lesions adjacent to their margins, and the cumulative rate of success was 93.4%. Color changes and marginal discolorations were found to be statistically significant (P < 0.001) at 3 years, although none of the restorations needed to be replaced. Significant differences were also observed in the caries rate (P < 0.001) at 3 years. Aside from the eight failed restorations, the degrees of color matching, marginal discoloration, wear or loss of anatomical form, caries, marginal adaptation, and surface texture were clinically acceptable at 3 years post-treatment.     

Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced composite inlay FPDs

PURPOSE: This clinical study evaluated the behavior of inlay fixed partial dentures (IFPD) with conventional and modified framework designs over a period of 12 to 48 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-one glass fiber-reinforced composite IFPDs were made to replace one missing maxillary or mandibular tooth. The frameworks were made only with parallel fibers in 19 restorations (group 1) and built with parallel and woven fibers modifying the design of the pontic element in 22 IFPDs (group 2) according to the manufacturer's instructions. All restorations were evaluated by color match, marginal discoloration, secondary caries, surface texture, marginal adaptation, fracture, and postoperative sensitivity. RESULTS: Three partial adhesive-cohesive veneering composite fractures occurred in the pontic element in group 1 after 3, 4, and 8 months, respectively. One cohesive fracture occurred in an abutment in group 2 after 46 months. Group 1 showed a 16% fracture failure rate; group 2 showed a 5% failure rate. However, no statistical difference was detected between the groups. IFPDs received the highest score at the following rates: color match 71%, marginal discoloration 96%, secondary caries 99%, surface texture 88%, marginal adaptation 98%, fracture 90%, and postoperative sensitivity 100%. Statistical analysis indicated significant deterioration of color match from baseline to last recall. CONCLUSION: There were nonsignificantly fewer fractures of the veneering composite with the modified design of the framework than with the conventional design. Repair of the fractured veneer of IFPDs may lengthen the lifespan of the restorations, but it is advisable only for slight damage.     

Clinical evaluation of flowable resins in non-carious cervical lesions: two-year results

This study evaluated the two-year clinical performance of one microhybrid composite and three different types of flowable resin materials in non-carious cervical lesions. A total of 252 noncarious cervical lesions were restored in 37 patients (12 male, 25 female) with Admira Flow, Dyract Flow, Filtek Flow and Filtek Z250, according to manufacturers' instructions. All the restorations were placed by one operator, and two other examiners evaluated the restorations clinically within one week after placement and after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months, using modified USPHS criteria. At the end of 24 months, 172 restorations were evaluated in 26 patients, with a recall rate of 68%. Statistical analysis was completed using the Pearson Chi-square and Fisher-Freeman-Halton tests (p < 0.05). Additionally, survival rates were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the Log-Rank test (p < 0.05). The Log-Rank test indicated statistically significant differences between the survival rates of Dyract Flow/Admira Flow and Dyract Flow/Filtek Z250 (p < 0.05). While there was a statistically significant difference between Dyract Flow and the other materials for color match at 12 and 18 months, no significant difference was observed among all of the materials tested at 24 months. Significant differences were revealed between Filtek Z250 and the other materials for marginal adaptation at 18 and 24 months (p < 0.05). With respect to marginal discoloration, secondary caries, surface texture and anatomic form, no significant differences were found between the resin materials (p > 0.05). It was concluded that different types of resin materials demonstrated acceptable clinical performance in non-carious cervical lesions, except for the retention rates of the Dyract Flow restorations.