The quality of fillings consisting of a hybrid composite was compared with fillings consisting of two different microfilled composites in a clinical examination. Within the design of a clinically controlled two-year study conducted under practice-relevant conditions, the composites C-Fill MH (Megadenta), Helio Progress (Vivadent), and Visio-Dispers (ESPE) were examined in anterior-tooth cavities in 134 patients by means of the split-mouth technique. The clinical examinations were performed based on modified Ryge criteria (marginal integrity, anatomical form, secondary caries, color, marginal discoloration, surface roughness) after 12 and 24 months. Immediately following filling application, all evaluation criteria except color were assessed as level A. After 12 and 24 months, C-Fill MH was found to be significantly superior to the other materials with regard to marginal integrity, color, and marginal discoloration. The hybrid composite C-Fill MH seems to be superior to the microfilled composites and should therefore be preferred as a restorative filling material.
Keywords: Ryge criterion, clinical investigation, microfilled composite, hybrid composite, longitudinal study