SynthesisClinical oral investigations2019
Clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional resin composite restorations in posterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 86 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Clinical Performance of Injectable Universal Flowable Composite Versus Conventional Resin Composite Restorations in Proximal Cavities of Posterior Teeth.
Comparison of Postoperative Sensitivity in Posterior Teeth Using Conventional and Bulkfill Composites
Who cites it
86 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Polymer-based restorative outcomes following deep margin elevation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The clinical performance of bulk-fill versus the incremental layered application of direct resin composite restorations: a systematic review.Evidence-based dentistry · 2023Pooled it
- Is the clinical performance of composite resin restorations in posterior teeth similar if restored with incremental or bulk-filling techniques? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Pooled it
- Use of flowable resin composite as an intermediate layer in class II restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical evaluation of different bi-layer biomimetic strategies of composite resin in large class I cavities: an 18-month randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Clinical performance of a bulk-fill versus a nanofilled resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions with different extensions: a 6-years randomized, parallel, double-blind clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Comparative evaluation of clinical performance of bulk-fill composites with incrementally layered conventional composites.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Two-year evaluation of a nano-hybrid and a bulk-fill resin composite: a randomized, double-blind split-mouth clinical study.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Trial
- Influence of high-irradiance light curing on the marginal integrity of composite restorations in primary teeth.BMC oral health · 2023Trial
- Can composite packaging and selective enamel etching affect the clinical behavior of bulk-fill composite resin in posterior restorations? 24-month results of a randomized clinical trial.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2023Trial
- Six-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill and nanofill resin composite restorations.Clinical oral investigations · 2022Trial
- Thirty-six-month clinical evaluation of posterior high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite restorations in a high caries incidence population: interim results of a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2021Trial
- One-year clinical evaluation of class II bulk-fill restorations in primary molars: a randomized clinical trial.Brazilian dental journalTrial
- Universal Adhesive Bonding to Sound and Artificially Demineralized Dentin: The Role of Etching Strategy and Resin Composite Type.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Predicting the final color of layered resin composites from background-dependent optical measurements: a translucency-informed model.Odontology · 2026Article
- In vitro evaluation of the microhardness of conventional and bulk-fill resins based on the depth of light-curing and the curing unit.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2026Review
- Bioactive Fillers in Bulk-Fill Composite Resins: A Comprehensive Review of the Effects on Polymerization Shrinkage Behavior and Mechanical Performance.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Surface roughness changes in bulk-fill resin composites after simulated toothbrushing with whitening toothpastes.BMC oral health · 2026Article
26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this systematic review was to compare the clinical performance of bulk-fill resin composites with conventional resin composites used for direct restorations of posterior teeth.
methodsThis review followed the PRISMA statement. This review was registered at PROSPERO (registration number CRD42016053436). A search of the scientific literature was performed by two independent reviewers using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from commencement until January 2018. The research question was "Do bulk-fill resin composites have a clinical performance comparable to conventional resin composites in posterior restorations?" Only studies evaluating class I and II direct restorations in permanent teeth with a follow-up period of at least 1 year were included. The RevMan 5 program was used for meta-analysis, calculating the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of the dichotomous outcome (restoration failure or success).
resultsTen articles were selected, comprising 941 analyzed restorations. The mean follow-up period was 33.6 months (12-72 months). No statistically significant differences in the failure rate were observed between conventional and base/flowable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.31; RR 1.49; 95% CI 0.69-3.25) or full-body/sculptable bulk-fill resin composites (p = 0.12; RR 1.89; 95% CI 0.84-4.24).
conclusionsThe present systematic review and meta-analysis indicate similar clinical performances of bulk-fill and conventional resin composites over a follow-up period of 12 to 72 months. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Based on the results of this study, the bulk-fill resin composites could be an alternative for direct restorations in posterior teeth. However, clinical trials of longer duration are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29594349What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.