Avaliou-se clinicamente 2 resinas compostas (Z-100 e Fill Magic),quanto a: sensibilidade pós-operatória, forma anatômica, cárie secundária, integridade marginal, descoloração marginal, cor e a influência do período de observação (“baseline", 6 meses, 1 ano e 2 anos) no desempenho desses fatores. Participaram 43 pacientes, que receberam 2 restaurações de classe III, 1 de cada resina, totalizando 86 restaurações. Fez-se a avaliação inicial das restaurações, o “baseline", 7 dias após a sua confecção, por 2 examinadores. Cada item recebia um escore em 3 níveis: bom (0), aceitável (1) e inaceitável (2). Somente para a cárie considerava-se 2 níveis: ausente (0) e presente (1). Fotografou-se as restaurações em todos os períodos de observação. Obteve-se moldagens das restaurações de 10 pacientes, para análise e fotografias em Microscópio Eletrônico de Varredura, com aumento de 40 X. Dos 43 pacientes, 8 não retornaram, assim, analisou-se estatisticamente pelo teste exato de Fisher, 70 restaurações. No baseline, 34 restaurações com a resina composta Z-100 e 35 com a Fill Magic receberam escores zero em todas as categorias, com exceção de 1 caso com a resina Z-100 que recebeu escore 1 para o critério cor. Para esse mesmo critério, aos 6 meses, 35 restaurações com a Fill Magic e com a Z-100, 31 restaurações receberam escores zero e 4 mereceram escores 1. Em 1 ano, 31 restaurações com a Z-100 ficaram com escores zero e 4 com escores 1; 34 restaurações com Fill Magic obtiveram escores zero e 1 obteve escore 1, com relação à cor. Aos 2 anos, também com relação à cor, para 3 restaurações com Z-100 e para 1 com Fill Magic atribuíram-se escores 1; escores 0 foram aplicados a 32 das restaurações de Z-100 e a 34 das de Fill Magic. Exceto para a categoria cor, que sofreu mudanças com o passar do tempo, todas as restaurações receberam escores 0 na avaliação “baseline", 6 meses, 1 ano e 2 anos. Nenhum escore 2 foi anotado. Não observou-se diferença estatisticamente significante entre as 2 resinas compostas, aceitando-se a hipótese de igualdade entre as mesmas.

The purpose of this study was to clinically evaluate two composite resins at 2-year period. Seventy Class III restorations were made by only one operator, 35 with Z-100 composite resin and 35 with Fill Magic. The teeth were selected based on clinical exams. Restorations included only anterior superior teeth. Following cavity preparations, under rubber dam, they were protected with calcium hydroxide and/or a glass ionomer base. Magic Adhesiv/Fill Magic (Vigodent) and Scotchbond Multipurpose Plus/Z-100 (3M) were used for adhesion to exposed dentin and enamel and restoration of the cavities. The cavities were restored in increments. Restorations were finished using multi-laminated burs, Sof-Lex discs and Enhance System. Evaluation was assessed after finishing and polishing approximately one week after placement (baseline), 6 months, 1 year and 2 years using the modified Ryge criteria for color, marginal discoloration, anatomic form, marginal integrity, secondary caries and post-operative sensitivity. There were three levels of scores for each category: good (0), acceptable (1) and unacceptable (2). Only for secondary caries there were 2 levels: absent (0) and present (1). Besides, it was investigated the occurrence of postoperative sensitivity, which was classified as the other scores were for another characteristics observed. At every evaluation, impressions from the restorations were made and they were examined by scanning electron microscopy. At baseline, there was one score “one" for category color for Z-100 composite resin; the other restorations and the other composite resin were graded to be “zero". At 6 months recall, the restorations were assessed and there were four scores “one" for Z-100 composite resin. The restorations were evaluated at 1 year and the results were as follow: there were four scores “one" for Z-100 composite resin and one score “one" for Fill Magic composite resin with regard to color. At 2-year evaluation were observed three scores “one" for Z-100 composite resin and one score “one" for Fill Magic. Except for color category, all the restorations received score “zero" either for 6 months, 1-year and 2- year recalls. No scores “two" were noted. The results were analyzed by Fisher Exact Statistical Test. No significant differences were noted between both composite resins. In conclusion, these two composite resins demonstrated excellent clinical acceptability in all categories assessed, making them suitable for anterior restorations.