Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Clinical Oral Investigations
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations 1/2013

Open Access 01-01-2013 | Original Article

Clinical evaluation of the performance and safety of a new dentine substitute, Biodentine, in the restoration of posterior teeth — a prospective study

Authors: Gilles Koubi, Pierre Colon, Jean-Claude Franquin, Aline Hartmann, Gilles Richard, Marie-Odile Faure, Grégory Lambert

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

A multicentric randomized, 3-year prospective study was conducted to determine for how long Biodentine, a new biocompatible dentine substitute, can remain as a posterior restoration.

Materials and methods

First, Biodentine was compared to the composite Z100®, to evaluate whether and for how long it could be used as a posterior restoration according to selected United States Public Health Service (USPHS)’ criteria (mean ± SD). Second, when abrasion occurred, Biodentine was evaluated as a dentine substitute combined with Z100®.

Results

A total of 397 cases were included. This interim analysis was conducted on 212 cases that were seen for the 1-year recall. On the day of restoration placement, both materials obtained good scores for material handling, anatomic form (0.12 ± 0.33), marginal adaptation (0.01 ± 0.10) and interproximal contact (0.11 ± 0.39). During the follow-up, both materials scored well in surface roughness (≤1) without secondary decay and post-operative pain. Biodentine kept acceptable surface properties regarding anatomic form score (≤1), marginal adaptation score (≤2) and interproximal contact score (≤1) for up to 6 months after placement. Resistance to marginal discoloration was superior with Biodentine compared to Z100®. When Biodentine was retained as a dentine substitute after pulp vitality control, it was covered systematically with the composite Z100®. This procedure yielded restorations that were clinically sound and symptom free.

Conclusions

Biodentine is able to restore posterior teeth for up to 6 months. When subsequently covered with Z100®, it is a convenient, efficient and well tolerated dentine substitute.

Clinical relevance

Biodentine as a dentine substitute can be used under a composite for posterior restorations.
Literature
1.
Bates MN (2006) Mercury amalgam dental fillings: an epidemiologic assessment. Int J Hyg Environ Health 209:309–316PubMedCrossRef
2.
CoSA ADA (2003) Direct and indirect restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 134:463–472
3.
Laurent P, Camps J, De Meo M, Dejou J, About I (2008) Induction of specific cell responses to a Ca(3)SiO(5)-based posterior restorative material. Dent Mater 24:1486–1494PubMedCrossRef
4.
Pradelle-Plasse N, Tran X-V, Colon P, Laurent P, Aubut V, About I et al (2009) Emerging trends in (bio)material research. An example of new material: preclinical multicentric studies on a new Ca3SiO5-based dental material. In: Goldberg M (ed) Biocompatibility or cytotoxic effects of dental composites, 1st edn. Oxford, UK: Coxmoor Publishing Company, pp 184–203
5.
Villat C, Tran XV, Pradelle-Plasse N, Ponthiaux P, Wenger F, Grosgogeat B et al (2010) Impedance methodology: a new way to characterize the setting reaction of dental cements. Dent Mater 26:1127–1132PubMedCrossRef
6.
Leinfelder KF (1995) Posterior composite resins: the materials and their clinical performance. J Am Dent Assoc 126:663–664, 7–8, 71–72 passimPubMed
7.
Lesot H, Osman M, Ruch JV (1981) Immunofluorescent localization of collagens, fibronectins, and laminin during terminal differentiation of odontoblasts. Dev Biol 82:371–381PubMedCrossRef
8.
Butler WT, Bhown M, D’Souza RN, Farach-Carson MC, Happonen R-P, Schrohenloher RE et al (1992) Isolation, characterization and immunolocalization of a 53-kDa dentin sialoprotein. Matrix 12:343–351PubMedCrossRef
9.
About I, Maquin D, Lendahl U, Mitsiadis TA (2000) Expression of nestin in human teeth. Am J Pathol 157:287–295PubMedCrossRef
10.
Briso AL, Mestrener SR, Delicio G, Sundfeld RH, Bedran-Russo AK, de Alexandre RS et al (2007) Clinical assessment of postoperative sensitivity in posterior composite restorations. Oper Dent 32:421–426PubMedCrossRef
11.
Geurtsen W, Schoeler U (1997) A 4-year retrospective clinical study of Class I and Class II composite restorations. J Dent 25:229–232PubMedCrossRef
12.
Raskin A, Eschrich G, About I, Dejou J (2010) Biodentine microleakage in class II open-sandwich restorations. J Dent Res 89 (Spec Iss B): abstract number 630.
13.
About I, Laurent P, Tecles O. (2010) Bioactivity of Biodentine: a Ca3SiO5-based dentin substitute. J Dent Res. 89 (Spec Iss B): abstract number 150
14.
Bernardo M, Luis H, Martin MD, Leroux BG, Rue T, Leitao J et al (2007) Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc 138:775–783PubMed
Metadata
Title
Clinical evaluation of the performance and safety of a new dentine substitute, Biodentine, in the restoration of posterior teeth — a prospective study
Authors
Gilles Koubi
Pierre Colon
Jean-Claude Franquin
Aline Hartmann
Gilles Richard
Marie-Odile Faure
Grégory Lambert
Publication date
01-01-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 1/2013
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0701-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Clinical Oral Investigations 1/2013 Go to the issue

Original Article

Maxillary rehabilitation of periodontally compromised patients with extensive one-piece fixed prostheses supported by natural teeth: a retrospective longitudinal study

Original Article

The original family revisited after 37 years: odontoma–dysphagia syndrome is most likely caused by a microduplication of chromosome 11q13.3, including the FGF3 and FGF4 genes

Original Article

An in vitro comparison of subjective image quality of panoramic views acquired via 2D or 3D imaging

Original Article

Influence of MMP-8 promoter polymorphism in early osseointegrated implant failure

Original Article

Interactions between endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) and titanium implant surfaces

Original Article

Connective tissue graft plus resin-modified glass ionomer restoration for the treatment of gingival recession associated with non-carious cervical lesions: microbiological and immunological results