Literature DB >> 15470871

Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition.

Juergen Manhart1, Hongyan Chen, Gerald Hamm, Reinhard Hickel.   

Abstract

This review provides a survey on the longevity of restorations in stress-bearing posterior cavities and assesses possible reasons for clinical failure. The dental literature, predominantly since 1990, was reviewed for longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies of posterior restorations. Only studies investigating the clinical performance of restorations in permanent teeth were included. Longevity and annual failure rates of amalgam, direct composite restorations, compomers, glass ionomers and derivative products, composite and ceramic inlays and cast gold restorations were determined for Class I and II cavities. Mean (SD) annual failure rates in posterior stress-bearing cavities are: 3.0% (1.9) for amalgam restorations, 2.2% (2.0) for direct composites, 3.6% (4.2) for direct composites with inserts, 1.1% (1.2) for compomer restorations, 7.2% (5.6) for regular glass ionomer restorations, 7.1% (2.8) for tunnel glass ionomers, 6.0% (4.6) for ART glass ionomers, 2.9% (2.6) for composite inlays, 1.9% (1.8) for ceramic restorations, 1.7% (1.6) for CAD/CAM ceramic restorations and 1.4% (1.4) for cast gold inlays and onlays. Publications from 1990 forward showed better results. Indirect restorations exhibited a significantly lower mean annual failure rate than direct techniques (p=0.0031). Longevity of dental restorations is dependent upon many different factors, including material, patient- and dentist-related. Principal reasons for failure were secondary caries, fracture, marginal deficiencies, wear and postoperative sensitivity. We need to learn to distinguish between reasons that cause early failures and those that are responsible for restoration loss after several years of service.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15470871

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  108 in total

1.  Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of ceramic inlays in vitro.

Authors:  Roland Frankenberger; Julia Hehn; Jan Hajtó; Norbert Krämer; Michael Naumann; Andreas Koch; Matthias J Roggendorf
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  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

3.  Two-year evaluation of a new nano-ceramic restorative material.

Authors:  J F Schirrmeister; K Huber; E Hellwig; P Hahn
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Comparative study of the wear behavior of composites for posterior restorations.

Authors:  Cecilia P Turssi; Juliana J Faraoni-Romano; Márcio de Menezes; Mônica C Serra
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials.

Authors:  R Hickel; J-F Roulet; S Bayne; S D Heintze; I A Mjör; M Peters; V Rousson; R Randall; G Schmalz; M Tyas; G Vanherle
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2007-01-30       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Proximal direct composite restorations and chairside CAD/CAM inlays: marginal adaptation of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel conditioning.

Authors:  T Bortolotto; I Onisor; I Krejci
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Preparing practicing dentists to engage in practice-based research.

Authors:  Timothy A DeRouen; Philippe Hujoel; Brian Leroux; Lloyd Mancl; Jeffrey Sherman; Thomas Hilton; Joel Berg; Jack Ferracane
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.634

8.  Shear bond strength of self-adhesive resins compared to resin cements with etch and rinse adhesives to enamel and dentin in vitro.

Authors:  A-K Lührs; S Guhr; H Günay; W Geurtsen
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2009-05-09       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Durability of self-healing dental composites: A comparison of performance under monotonic and cyclic loading.

Authors:  Mobin Yahyazadehfar; George Huyang; Xiaohong Wang; Yuwei Fan; Dwayne Arola; Jirun Sun
Journal:  Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 7.328

10.  Success rates of manual restorative treatment (MRT) with amalgam in permanent teeth in high caries-risk Filipino children.

Authors:  I M Schüler; B Monse; C J Holmgren; T Lehmann; G S Itchon; R Heinrich-Weltzien
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.573

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.