Cetin, Ali RizaUnlu, Nimet2020-03-262020-03-2620090287-4547https://dx.doi.org/10.4012/dmj.28.620https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/23725The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of three direct composite resins and two indirect inlay systems in posterior teeth using the modified USPHS criteria. A total of 1.00 restorations were placed in the molars of 54 patients by one operator. All restorations were directly evaluated by two examiners at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Statistical analysis was conducted using McNemar chi-square test at a significance level of 5% (p<0.05). Recall rate was 100% at 6 and 12 months, and all the restorations evaluated (i.e., 100%) received Alpha rating for the criteria of retention and gingival adaptation. At 12 months for the surface texture criterion, 80% of Filtek Supreme XT received Alpha rating while it was 95% for Tetric EvoCeram and AELITE Aesthetic. For marginal discoloration, 85% of Tescera ATL and Filtek Supreme XT received Alpha rating while it was 95% for Tetric EvoCeram and AELITE Aesthetic. Further, none of the restorative systems received a Charlie rating for any of the criteria at all evaluation periods. In summary, all the restorations demonstrated clinically satisfactory performance with no significant differences detected among them.en10.4012/dmj.28.620info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNanocomposite resinPosterior composite resinClinical evaluationArticle28562062619822994Q1WOS:000272514000014Q4