This study aimed to assess the clinical longevity of a bulk-fill resin composite in Class II restorations for 3-year.

Patient record files acquired from the 40 patients who were treated due to needed 2 similar sizes Class II composite restorations were used for this retrospective study. In the experimental cavity, the flowable resin composite SDR was inserted in the dentinal part as a 4 mm intermediate layer. A 2 mm coverage layer with a nano-hybrid resin composite (CeramX) was placed on SDR. The control restoration was performed by an incremental technique of 2 mm using the nano-hybrid resin composite. The restorations were blindly assessed by 2 calibrated examiners using modified United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline and 1, 2, and 3 years. The data were analyzed using non-parametric tests (p = 0.05).

Eighty Class II restorations were evaluated. After 3-years, 4 restorations (5%) failed, 1 SDR + CeramX, and 3 CeramX restorations. The annual failure rate (AFR) of the restorations was 1.7%. The SDR + CeramX group revealed an AFR of 0.8%, and the CeramX group an AFR of 2.5% (p > 0.05). Regarding anatomical form and marginal adaptation, significant alterations were observed in the CeramX group after 3-years (p < 0.05). The changes in the color match were observed in each group over time (p < 0.05).

The use of SDR demonstrated good clinical durability in deep Class II resin composite restorations.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different concentrations of nanofillers on the chemical and physical properties of ethanol-solvated and non-solvated dental adhesives.

Eight experimental adhesives were prepared with different nanofiller concentrations (0, 1, 2, and 4 wt%) and 2 solvent concentrations (0% and 10% ethanol). Several properties of the experimental adhesives were evaluated, such as water sorption and solubility (n = 5, 20 seconds light activation), real-time degree of conversion (DC; n = 3, 20 and 40 seconds light activation), and stability of cohesive strength at 6 months (CS; n = 20, 20 seconds light activation) using the microtensile test. A light-emitting diode (Bluephase 20i, Ivoclar Vivadent) with an average light emittance of 1,200 mW/cm² was used.

The presence of solvent reduced the DC after 20 seconds of curing, but increased the final DC, water sorption, and solubility of the adhesives. Storage in water reduced the strength of the adhesives. The addition of 1 wt% and 2 wt% nanofillers increased the polymerization rate of the adhesives.

The presence of nanofillers and ethanol improved the final DC, although the DC of the solvated adhesives at 20 seconds was lower than that of the non-solvated adhesives. The presence of ethanol reduced the strength of the adhesives and increased their water sorption and solubility. However, nanofillers did not affect the water sorption and strength of the tested adhesives.

In most retrospective studies, the clinical performance of restorations had not been considered in survival analysis. This study investigated the effect of including the clinically unacceptable cases according to modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria into the failed data on the survival analysis of direct restorations as to the longevity and prognostic variables.

Nine hundred and sixty-seven direct restorations were evaluated. The data of 204 retreated restorations were collected from the records, and clinical performance of 763 restorations in function was evaluated according to modified USPHS criteria by two observers. The longevity and prognostic variables of the restorations were compared with a factor of involving clinically unacceptable cases into the failures using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazard model.

The median survival times of amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer were 11.8, 11.0 and 6.8 years, respectively. Glass ionomer showed significantly lower longevity than composite resin and amalgam. When clinically unacceptable restorations were included into the failure, the median survival times of them decreased to 8.9, 9.7 and 6.4 years, respectively.

After considering the clinical performance, composite resin was the only material that showed a difference in the longevity (p < 0.05) and the significantly higher relative risk of student group than professor group disappeared in operator groups. Even in the design of retrospective study, clinical evaluation needs to be included.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the whitening efficacy and longevity of home bleaching.

A total of 28 patients were divided into either experimental group (Opalescence F; 15% carbamide peroxide) or control group randomly. The patients in experimental group were instructed to wear individual trays applied with bleaching gel for 2 hours a day for 4 weeks. Any treatments weren't applied to the patients in control group. The color measurements of central incisors, lateral incisors & canines of upper and lower arch were recorded at base line, immediately after the finishment of treatmemt (4 weeks), 8 weeks and 12 weeks using Colorimeter (Chroma Meter, 2600d Konica Minolta co.) and Vitapan classical shade guide (Vita Zahnfabrik).

A significantly stronger color change was observed for overall teeth samples in experimental group immediately after treatment (at 4 weeks) compared to ones in control group (p < 0.05). There was also a significant difference between baseline and 8 weeks or 12 weeks separately though color rebouncing phenomenon occurred as time went by (p < 0.05).

The clinical effecacy and longevity of home bleaching without combined application of in-office bleaching was observed through this experiment.