Literature DB >> 12768463

Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.

A Brunthaler1, F König, T Lucas, W Sperr, A Schedle.   

Abstract

This review is a survey of prospective studies on the clinical performance of posterior resin composites published between 1996 and 2002. Material, patient- and operator-specific data, observation periods, isolation methods of the operative field, and failure rates are detailed in tables. The data were evaluated statistically in order to assess the role of materials (filler size, bonding system, base materials [e.g. glass ionomer cements], and lining materials), study design, and personnel on failure rates. The primary reasons for composite failure were secondary caries, restoration fracture, and marginal defects. The influence of different commercial material brands on failure rates was not evaluated due to the great variety of test substances and the lack of material-specific documentation. Effects of the isolation method of the operative field (rubber dam or cotton rolls) and the professional status of operators (university or general dentist) on composite failure rates were not found to be significant. Observation periods varied from 1 to 17 years, and failure rates ranged between 0% and 45%. A linear correlation between failure rate and observation period was found (P<0.0001). Thirteen of 24 studies were terminated after 3 years, while seven studies continued for more than 10 years, indicating that favourable results for composite materials are frequently based on short-term results, despite higher dropout rates in longer studies. To determine accurately the risk for patients, long-term, randomised, controlled clinical trials of treatment outcomes with composites used in posterior teeth are clearly needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12768463     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-003-0206-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  33 in total

1.  Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  R W Wassell; A W Walls; J F McCabe
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  Twenty-four-month clinical evaluation of different posterior composite resin materials.

Authors:  L S Türkün; B O Aktener
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.634

3.  Class I and II posterior composite resin restorations after 5 and 10 years.

Authors:  S A Lundin; G Koch
Journal:  Swed Dent J       Date:  1999

4.  Clinical performance and margin analysis of ariston pHc versus Solitaire I as posterior restorations after 1 year.

Authors:  A R Braun; R Frankenberger; N Krämer
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for posterior teeth after 3 years.

Authors:  C P Ernst; M Martin; S Stuff; B Willershausen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Saucer-shaped cavity preparations for posterior approximal resin composite restorations: observations up to 10 years.

Authors:  H Nordbø; J Leirskar; F R von der Fehr
Journal:  Quintessence Int       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 1.677

7.  A two-year clinical evaluation of TPH for restoration of Class II carious lesions in permanent teeth.

Authors:  R D Perry; G Kugel; C M Habib; P McGarry; L Settembrini
Journal:  Gen Dent       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug

8.  2-year clinical evaluation of Class I posterior composites.

Authors:  A I Abdalla; H A Alhadainy
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 1.522

9.  Clinical criteria.

Authors:  G Ryge
Journal:  Int Dent J       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 2.512

10.  A practice-based, randomized, controlled clinical trial of a new resin composite restorative: one-year results.

Authors:  M A Wilson; A J Cowan; R C Randall; R J Crisp; N H F Wilson
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.440

View more
  64 in total

1.  A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Fábio Herrmann Coelho-De-Souza; Junara Cristina Camargo; Tiago Beskow; Matheus Dalmolin Balestrin; Celso Afonso Klein-Júnior; Flávio Fernando Demarco
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.698

2.  Investigations towards nano-hybrid resin-based composites.

Authors:  Nicoleta Ilie; Adam Rencz; Reinhard Hickel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Rubber dam use during routine operative dentistry procedures: findings from the Dental PBRN.

Authors:  Gregg H Gilbert; Mark S Litaker; Daniel J Pihlstrom; Craig W Amundson; Valeria V Gordan
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2010 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.440

4.  Effects of water-aging on self-healing dental composite containing microcapsules.

Authors:  Junling Wu; Michael D Weir; Mary Anne S Melo; Howard E Strassler; Hockin H K Xu
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2016-01-22       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Five-year evaluation of a low-shrinkage Silorane resin composite material: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Malene Schmidt; Irene Dige; Lise-Lotte Kirkevang; Michael Vaeth; Preben Hørsted-Bindslev
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites.

Authors:  Nicoleta Ilie; Reinhard Hickel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-02-26       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  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

8.  Degradation in the fatigue strength of dentin by cutting, etching and adhesive bonding.

Authors:  H H Lee; H Majd; S Orrego; B Majd; E Romberg; M M Mutluay; D Arola
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 5.304

9.  Longevity of posterior composite and compomer restorations in children placed under different types of anesthesia: a retrospective 5-year study.

Authors:  Andreas Pummer; Fabian Cieplik; Milan Nikolić; Wolfgang Buchalla; Karl-Anton Hiller; Gottfried Schmalz
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Effects of simulated functional loading conditions on dentin, composite, and laminate structures.

Authors:  Mary P Walker; Heather K Teitelbaum; J David Eick; Karen B Williams
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.368

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.