Literature DB >> 14582592

A two-year clinical evaluation of a new calcium aluminate cement in Class II cavities.

Jan W V van Dijken1, Karin Sunnegårdh-Grönberg.   

Abstract

A calcium aluminate cement (Doxa Certex, Uppsala, Sweden) has recently been developed intended for use as direct restorative filling material for posterior restorations. The material is inorganic and non-metallic and the main components are CaO, Al2O3, SiO2, and water. The aim of this study was to evaluate intra-individually the experimental calcium aluminate cement (CAC) and a resin composite (RC) in Class II restorations. Each of 57 participants received at least one pair of restorations of the same size, one CAC and one RC (Tetric Ceram). Sixty-one pairs were performed. The restorations were evaluated clinically, according to slightly modified USPHS criteria, at baseline, after 6 months, 1, and 2 years. One-hundred-and-twenty restorations were evaluated at 2 years. Postoperative sensitivity was reported for 5 restorations (2 RC, 3 CAC). Significantly better clinical durability was shown for RC. Five non-acceptable CAC restorations (8.2%) were observed at 6 months, 10 CAC (16.7%) and 2 RC (3.3%) at 12 months, and 11 CAC (18.3%) at 24 months. This resulted in a cumulative failure frequency of 43.3% for the CAC material and 3.3% for the RC material. Main reasons for failure for the CAC were partial material fracture (7), cusp fracture (5), and proximal chip fracture (6). The CAC showed a non-acceptable clinical failure rate for Class II restorations, probably caused by its difficult handling and low mechanical properties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14582592     DOI: 10.1080/00016350310004575

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Odontol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6357            Impact factor:   2.331


  6 in total

1.  Capping a pulpotomy with calcium aluminosilicate cement: comparison to mineral trioxide aggregates.

Authors:  Phillip R Kramer; Karl F Woodmansey; Robert White; Carolyn M Primus; Lynne A Opperman
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  2014-04-08       Impact factor: 4.171

2.  Clinical performance of a nanofilled resin composite with and without an intermediary layer of flowable composite: a 2-year evaluation.

Authors:  Sebastian Stefanski; Jan W V van Dijken
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 3.  Compliance of randomized controlled trials in posterior restorations with the CONSORT statement: a systematic review of methodology.

Authors:  Márcia Rezende; Ana Cristina Rodrigues Martins; Jadson Araújo da Silva; Alessandra Reis; Juliana Larocca de Geus
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 3.606

4.  Postoperative hypersensitivity and its relationship to preparation variables in Class I resin-based composite restorations: findings from the practitioners engaged in applied research and learning (PEARL) Network. Part 1.

Authors:  Gary Berkowitz; Howard Spielman; Abigail Matthews; Donald Vena; Ronald Craig; Frederick Curro; Van Thompson
Journal:  Compend Contin Educ Dent       Date:  2013-03

5.  Clinical performance of class I cavities restored with bulk fill composite at a 1-year follow-up using the FDI criteria: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Chinni Suneelkumar; Puttaganti Harshala; Koppolu Madhusudhana; Anumula Lavanya; Anirudhan Subha; Sannapureddy Swapna
Journal:  Restor Dent Endod       Date:  2021-04-16

6.  One-year clinical results of restorations using a novel self-adhesive resin-based bulk-fill restorative.

Authors:  Andreas Rathke; Frank Pfefferkorn; Michael K McGuire; Rick H Heard; Rainer Seemann
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.