ArticleJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026
Incremental versus bulk-fill techniques in Class I restorations using Smart Dentin Replacement Plus and Tetric N-Ceram: A prospective randomized split-mouth clinical trial.
Article in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Polymerization shrinkage and postoperative sensitivity remain significant concerns in posterior composite restorations. Although bulk-fill composites simplify clinical procedures, their long-term clinical performance compared with incremental techniques remains controversial. Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of Smart Dentin Replacement Plus (SDR+) and Tetric N-Ceram composites when placed using incremental and bulk-fill techniques in Class I pit and fissure cavities over a 6- and 12-month follow-up period. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized split-mouth clinical trial included 44 patients (18-35 years) with Class I pit and fissure caries. Teeth were randomly allocated into four groups ( Results: At 6 and 12 months, the incremental technique groups demonstrated significantly higher clinical success (90.91%) compared with the bulk-fill groups (SDR+ - 45.45% and Tetric N-Ceram - 54.55%) ( Clinical Significance: Placement technique plays a more decisive role than composite material selection in the long-term success of posterior restorations. Conclusion: Incremental placement technique showed superior clinical performance compared to the bulk-fill technique in Class I restorations, irrespective of the composite material used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.