Literature DB >> 11570687

Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report.

P Gaengler1, I Hoyer, R Montag.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To summarize all clinically relevant data of a 10-year prospective evaluation of posterior glass-ionomer cement/composite restorations (Ketac Bond/Visio-Molar radiopaque).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: For this study 194 hybrid composite fillings (115 Class I, 79 Class II) were applied in 73 adult patients. The exposed dentin was covered with glass-ionomer cement. The clinical evaluation was carried out at baseline, after 6 months and at 1-year intervals up to 10 years. The USPHS-compatible CPM Index was used with the C and P criteria presented here for anatomic form, color match, surface quality, wear, marginal integrity, marginal ledge, marginal discoloration, secondary caries, and clinical acceptability. Thermal and electrical sensitivity testing were recorded annually.
RESULTS: At baseline, 194 restorations were rated. The drop-out of patients comprised 108 fillings after 10 years. During this time, 24 restorations could not be followed up because of new carious lesions at different sites and/or prosthodontic treatment (drop-out of teeth). Forty-six composite restorations were longitudinally controlled over 10 years, and 16 more fillings failed before the end of the study (3 filling fractures, 7 partial filling losses, 1 total filling loss, 5 cases of secondary caries). Only Class II composite restorations exhibited secondary caries (4 fillings after 7 years and 1 filling after 9 years). After 10 years, the correct anatomic form was preserved in 44 fillings, but all restorations showed rough surface and wear. The majority of restorations (26 fillings) was free of marginal discoloration, and the color match showed only 3 fillings being too dark. The marginal integrity was optimal at baseline and during the first year. During the second year a continuing degradation started and lasted until the end of the study. Thirteen restorations showed optimal marginal integrity after 10 years.
CONCLUSION: The USPHS-compatible CPM Index represents a sensitive rating system for long-term observation of posterior composite restorations. The early risk of failure is attributed to bulk fractures and partial loss of filling material. The longevity over 10 years is a maximum of 74.2%, and the very low secondary caries rate and the high percentage of correct anatomical form confirm the clinical safety of posterior composite restorations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11570687

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adhes Dent        ISSN: 1461-5185            Impact factor:   2.359


  14 in total

1.  Two-year clinical performance of a nanofiller vs a fine-particle hybrid resin composite.

Authors:  Claus-Peter Ernst; Mathias Brandenbusch; Gerrit Meyer; Kerem Canbek; Franziska Gottschalk; Brita Willershausen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-03-23       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Effects of metallic or translucent matrices for Class II composite restorations: 4-year clinical follow-up findings.

Authors:  Flávio Fernando Demarco; Tatiana Pereira-Cenci; Dárvi de Almeida André; Renata Pereira de Sousa Barbosa; Evandro Piva; Maximiliano Sérgio Cenci
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-01-05       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system: a 6-year evaluation.

Authors:  Sevil Gurgan; Zeynep Bilge Kutuk; Esra Ergin; Sema Seval Oztas; Filiz Yalcin Cakir
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can't predict?

Authors:  Jack L Ferracane
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 5.304

5.  Does a new formula have an input in the clinical success of posterior composite restorations? A chat study.

Authors:  Sevil Gurgan; Uzay Koc Vural; Zeynep Bilge Kutuk; Filiz Yalcin Cakir
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Clinical long-term success of contemporary nano-filled resin composites in class I and II restorations cured by LED or halogen light.

Authors:  Torsten Pflaum; Stefan Kranz; Regina Montag; Arndt Güntsch; Andrea Völpel; Robin Mills; Klaus Jandt; Bernd Sigusch
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-10-28       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 7.  Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  N J M Opdam; F H van de Sande; E Bronkhorst; M S Cenci; P Bottenberg; U Pallesen; P Gaengler; A Lindberg; M C D N J M Huysmans; J W van Dijken
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 6.116

8.  Clinical effects of laser-based cavity preparation on class V resin-composite fillings.

Authors:  Markus Heyder; Bernd Sigusch; Christoph Hoder-Przyrembel; Juliane Schuetze; Stefan Kranz; Markus Reise
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.752

9.  Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.

Authors:  A Brunthaler; F König; T Lucas; W Sperr; A Schedle
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-05-27       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Effect of filler size and temperature on packing stress and viscosity of resin-composites.

Authors:  Haitham Elbishari; Julian Satterthwaite; Nick Silikas
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.