• O. A. Udod Donetsk National Medical University, Liman, Ukraine
  • O. M. Borisenko Donetsk National Medical University, Liman, Ukraine
Keywords: nano-photocomposition material, adhesive system, dental restoration, clinical evaluation


Topicality. The newest technologies of restoration of teeth involve the use of photocomposition materials and adhesive systems, a certain role in the hardening of which is played by the characteristics of the light flux photopolymerizer. In order to minimize the number of complications after restoration, it is necessary to provide a complete solidification of adhesive systems.

Goal. Clinical assessment of dental restorations made from nanophoto-composite material for the application of the adhesive system of the V generation, the application and hardening of which was carried out in different regimes.

Materials and methods. 46 patients aged 19 to 40 years were examined, in which 67 lateral teeth with carious lesions of Grade I and II for Blake were restored with the use of a V-generation adhesive system using nanoproduction material. The patients examined were divided into three groups. In 15 patients in Group I, 21 tooth restorations were performed with polymerization of the adhesive system with a 600-mW / dm H2O photoconductor photoluminescence photomultizer, and 23 restoration was performed in 15 patients in Group II, using the same adhesive system with the photoconductive polymerization of light-intensity photomulpirants of constant intensity 1500 mW / cm2; in group ІІ there were 16 patients with 23 restorations, made by applying two layers of the adhesive system to the bottom and the wall of the opaque cavity of the adhesive system, each of which polimeryzuvaly's fotopolimeryzatora LED luminous flux of constant intensity 1500 mW / cm2. The state of restoration was evaluated the next day and after 6 and 12 months according to the clinical criteria of Ryge. Statistical processing was carried out using a computer program in the MS Excel XP package.

Results. The following day after restoration in all restoration of teeth there were no violations. After 6 months in patients of group I, limiting inclining was violated in 2 restorations (9.5% of the number of restorations in the patients in this group), the coloration was found in 3 restorations (14.3%), increased sensitivity - in 1 restored tooth (4, 8%). There was no secondary caries and color discrepancy. In patients of the II group, the violation of the boundary alignment was established in 1 restoration (4.3% of the number of restorations in the group), the border color - also in 1 restoration (4.3%), secondary caries, sensitivity and color discrepancy not established. Patients in group III had no violations.

After 12 months, in patients of Group I, the number of violations increased to 6 (28.6%), 5 restorations (23.8%) were found with the coloration on the border of the nanofococomposite, the secondary caries was detected in 2 restorations (9.5%), color discrepancy - also in 2 restorations (9.5%), there was no increased sensitivity. Patients in the group II of the regional adherence violations and cases of marginal coloration were, respectively, 3 (13.0%) and 2 (8.7%), secondary caries and color discrepancies - in one case (4.3%), there was no sensitivity. Patients in group III violations of boundary adherence of the material were established in 1 restoration (4.3%), border color - also in 1 restoration (4.3%), other violations were not detected. In group I patients, there were 15 violations in general, 7 in patients in group II, 2.1 times less; in patients of group III, there were only 3 disorders, that is, 5 times less than in group I patients.

Conclusions. The number of violations of lateral teeth restoration according to clinical criteria at all times was greatest in patients in which the adhesive system of the V generation was polymerized by a light flux of a halogen photopolymerizer of low intensity. The smallest number of complications was observed in patients who, during the recovery, applied the adhesive system to two layers, each of which was irradiated with a light flux of a high-intensity constant photoconductive photoconductor.

Prospects for further research. Laboratory studies on the influence of different modes of application and hardening of the adhesive system on the biophysical characteristics of the connection with hard tissue of the teeth are planned.


Download data is not yet available.


1. Борисенко А. В. Композиционные пломбировочные и облицовочные материалы / А. В. Борисенко, В. П. Неспрядько, Д. А. Борисенко // Медицина. – К.: ВСИ «Медицина», 2015. – С. 320.

2. Николаев А. И. Практическая терапевтическая стоматология : учеб. пособие / А. И. Николаев, Л. М. Цепов. – [9-е изд.]. – М.: МЕДпрессинформ, 2017. – 928 с.

3. Колодий Ю. Р. Инновационный нанокомпозитный материал в стоматологии / Ю. Р. Колодий // Бюллетень медицинских интернетконференций. – 2017. – № 7 (9). – С. 1418–1419.

4. Colak H. Shear bond strength of bulk-fill and nano-restorative materials to dentin / H. Colak, E. Ercan, M. M. Hamidi // Eur. J. Dent. – 2016. – № 10. – P. 40–45.

5. Остолоповская О. В. Современные адгезивные системы в клинической стоматологии / О. В. Остолоповская, А. В. Анохина, Г. Р. Рувинская // 2013. –№ 4(72). – С. 15–20.

6. Стоматологические адгезивные системы: перевод науки / М.Маргвелашвили, М. Каландадзе, А. Вики [и др.] // Дентарт. – 2013. – № 4. – С. 14.

7. Удод А. А. Адгезивные системы в реставрационной стоматологии: эволюция и перспективы / А. А. Удод, К. И. Сагунова // Вісник проблем біології і медицини. ‒ 2014. ‒ Вип. 2, т. 3(109). ‒ С. 53–57.

8. Koh Ya. Нанонаполнители – дорога в будущее адгезивов / Ya Koh // Современная стоматология. – 2005. – № 1. – С. 7–8.

9. Удод А. А. Изучение особенностей полимеризации нанонаполненных адгезивных систем / А. А. Удод, К. И. Бекузарова // Актуальные проблемы современной стоматологии : материалы науч.-практ. конф. с междунар. уч., 17–18 ноября 2017 г. – Самарканд, 2017. – С. 19–20.

10. Безвушко Е. В. Клінічна оцінка реставрацій із композитних матеріалів з урахуванням гігієни порожнини рота / Е. В. Безвушко, О. О. Шпотюк // Клінічна стоматологія. – 2017. – № 2. – С. 54–59.

11. Удод О. А. Клінічна оцінка фотокомпозиційних відновлень зубів, виконаних за удосконаленими підходами / О. А. Удод, Х. І. Бекузарова // Вісник проблем біології і медицини. ‒ 2018. ‒ Вип. 1, т. 2(143). ‒ С. 369– 373.

12. Ryge G. Клинические критерии / G. Ryge // Клиническая стоматология. – 1998. – № 3. – С. 40–46.
How to Cite