Thirty‐six month clinical evaluation of a highly filled flowable composite for direct posterior restorations

BACKGROUND: The aim of this randomized controlled study was to evaluate the clinical performance of a highly filled flowable composite compared to a conventional paste-type composite in direct posterior restorations after 36 months. METHODS: A total of 58 mid-size to extensive posterior composite restorations were randomly placed in 32 patients, mean age of 43.9 years (range 25-76), using either a conventional composite Estelite Sigma Quick (Conventional) or a highly filled flowable composite G-aenial Universal Flo with a two-step self-etch adhesive. The restorations were evaluated after placement (baseline) and at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months according to the FDI criteria. RESULTS: At the 36-month follow-up, 42 restorations were evaluated in 21 patients. After 36 months, the difference between highly filled flowable and conventional restorations was not statistically significant with respect to all evaluation parameters (p < 0.05). No secondary caries was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The highly filled flowable composite showed a comparable clinical effectiveness as the conventional paste composite in posterior restorations over 36 months.