This study aimed to evaluate the clinical performance of an alkasite restorative material in molars that had undergone root canal treatment.

The research was registered in Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials. The randomized clinical trial involved 33 patients, each with at least 1 mandibular molar requiring restoration after receiving endodontic treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either bulk-fill resin composite (Tetric N Ceram Bulk Fill, Ivoclar Vivadent) or the alkasite restorative material (Cention N, Ivoclar Vivadent). Upon completion of the restorations, 3 calibrated professionals utilized the United States Public Health Service criteria to assess various factors, including retention, secondary caries, marginal adaptation, restoration color, marginal pigmentation, and anatomical form. Evaluations were conducted at intervals of 7 days, 6 months, and 17 months. Additionally, the assessment encompassed the presence of radiolucent lines adjacent to the restoration, material deficiencies or excess, contact points, and caries recurrence. The data underwent analysis using the Friedman and Mann-Whitney tests (α = 0.05).

After 17 months, the results revealed that the alkasite restorative material exhibited greater wear of anatomical shape compared to the bulk-fill resin composite (p = 0.0189). Furthermore, the alkasite restorative material significantly differed from the natural tooth color in most cases (p = 0.0000). However, no other criteria displayed significant differences between the materials or over time (p > 0.05).

The alkasite restorative material (Cention N) emerges as a viable option for restoring endodontically treated teeth, displaying clinically acceptable alterations after a 17-month evaluation period.

Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) Identifier: RBR-97kx5jv

This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the effects of different whitening toothpastes on a composite resin during at-home bleaching with 10% carbamide peroxide.

Sixty samples (7 mm × 2 mm) were used for color and roughness analyses, while another 60 samples (3 mm × 2 mm) were utilized to assess microhardness. The factors analyzed included toothpaste, for which 5 options with varying active agents were tested (distilled water; conventional toothpaste; whitening toothpaste with abrasive agents; whitening toothpaste with abrasive and chemical agents; and whitening toothpaste with abrasive, chemical, and bleaching agents). Brushing and application of whitening gel were performed for 14 days. Surface microhardness (SMH), surface roughness (Ra), and color (∆L*, ∆a*, ∆b, ∆E*_ab, and ∆E₀₀) were analyzed. The Ra and SMH data were analyzed using mixed generalized linear models for repeated measures, while the color results were assessed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests.

Between the initial and final time points, all groups demonstrated significant increases in Ra and reductions in SMH. No significant differences were found between groups for SMH at the final time point, at which all groups differed from the distilled water group. Conventional toothpaste exhibited the lowest Ra, while whitening toothpaste with abrasive agent had the highest value. No significant differences were observed in ∆L*, ∆a*, and ∆b.

While toothpaste composition did not affect the color stability and microhardness of resin composite, combining toothbrushing with whitening toothpaste and at-home bleaching enhanced the change in Ra.