Abstract:This clinical study evaluated the retention and caries protection of a flowable resin composite (Flow Line) and a flowable compomer (Dyract Flow) used in preventive resin restorations as compared to the conventional preventive resin technique which uses a resin composite (Brilliant) and a sealant (Concise). This study observed 205 permanent molars with small carious cavities less than 1.5 mm in width, which were obtained from 165 children aged 7 to 15 years. Flowable resin composite was used to treat 75 teeth, and 71 teeth were treated with flowable compomer in both cavities and caries-free fissures. For the control group, 59 teeth were treated with resin composite in cavities and sealant in caries-free fissures. The teeth were evaluated at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24-month intervals. After three months, all 205 treated teeth were completely intact. After six months, 66 of the 71 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 65 of the 70 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 57 of the 58 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 12 months, 60 of the 67 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 61 of the 67 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 51 of the 55 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 18 months, 53 of the 61 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 54 of the 62 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 47 of the 53 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. After 24 months, 49 of the 58 teeth treated with flowable resin composite and 45 of the 57 teeth treated with flowable compomer were complete, compared to 42 of the 52 teeth treated with the conventional preventive resin technique. There were no statistically significant differences in retention rates among all groups after 3, 6, 12, 18 or 24-months (p>0.05). One tooth treated with flowable resin composite and one tooth treated with flowable compomer developed caries after 18 and 24 months, respectively, resulting from partial loss at "caries-free fissures." Five teeth developed caries in the conventional preventive resin group; one after 12 months, two after 18 months and one after 24 months, due to loss at cavities. The final caries occurred after 24 months, resulting from partial loss at "caries-free fissures." The differences in caries development among the three groups were not statistically significant (p>0.05). This study suggested that flowable resin composite and flowable compomer could be used for preventive resin restorations. Meanwhile, a vigilant recall should be followed-up due to the risk of failure for flowable materials in "caries-free" fissures. The repair should be performed immediately, in case the preventive resin restoration develops a fracture or loss.

Comparing the effectiveness of caries arrest by micro-operative treatment to operative treatment: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial

Clinical evaluation of caries removal with a chemo-mechanical Carisolv method

Comparison of three management approaches for dental caries in primary molars: A two-year randomized clinical trial

2-year survival and cost analysis of occlusoproximal ART restorations using encapsulated glass ionomer cement in primary molars: a randomized controlled trial

Two‐year clinical performance of indirect restorations fabricated from CAD/CAM nano hybrid composite versus lithium disilicate in mutilated vital teeth. A randomized controlled trial

Two-year clinical performance of indirect resin composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth with different cavity preparation designs: a randomized clinical trial

Comparison of the clinical performance of self-adhering flowable composite and resin-based pit and fissure sealant: a randomized clinical trial in pediatric patients

Clinical Evaluation of SonicFill Bulk Resin Technique in the Restoration of Proximal Deep Caries of Primary Molars: a Two-Year Randomized Controlled Trial

Two-year clinical and radiographic evaluation of ACTIVA BioACTIVE versus Compomer (Dyract® eXtra) in the restoration of class-2 cavities of primary molars: a non-inferior split-mouth randomised clinical trial

Influence of Cavity Lining on the 3-Year Clinical Outcome of Posterior Composite Restorations: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Clinical Comparison of Three Indirect Pulp Capping Restorative Protocols: A Randomized Controlled Prospective Study

Clinical evaluation of “Snowplow” technique versus Bulk-fill technique in restoration of class II cavities: A randomized clinical trial

Comparing the incidence of postoperative pain after root canal filling with warm vertical obturation with resin-based sealer and sealer-based obturation with calcium silicate-based sealer: a prospective clinical trial

Clinical Evaluation of a Flowable Resin Composite and Flowable Compomer for Preventive Resin Restorations.

[Clinical Evaluation of a Two-Step Etch-and-rinse Adhesive and a One-Step Self-Etch Adhesive in Non-Carious Cervical Lesion].

Long-Term Outcomes of Conservative versus Surgical Management of Dental Caries

Clinical, radiographic and biochemical assessment of proximal cavities restored with composite resin using incremental vs. bulk packing techniques: One-year randomized clinical trial

Effectiveness of silver diamine fluoride application with atraumatic restorative treatment in arresting the progression of dental caries: a systematic review protocol

Influence of different application protocols of universal adhesive system on the clinical behavior of Class I and II restorations of composite resin – a randomized and double-blind controlled clinical trial

Clinical performance and wear resistance of milled resin composite material versus direct nanohybrid bulk-fill resin composite in the restoration of endodontically treated posterior teeth over 1 year: Randomized clinical trial

Clinical effectiveness of direct resin composite restorations bonded using one-step or two-step self-etch adhesive systems: A three-year multicenter study