AIMS: To prospectively report on the survival of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), photac-fil and pre-formed stainless steel crown (SSC) restorations in primary molar teeth placed over a seven-year period in a specialist paediatric dental practice under private contract of remuneration. METHOD: All primary molar restorations placed by a specialist paediatric dentist over a seven-year period were reviewed and the outcome results recorded. Data were recorded at review visits until June 30, 2003. Data recorded included Class I restorations, Class II restorations and SSC. The Class II cavities were either mesial or distal, with or without buccal/palatal extensions. If both proximal surfaces were decayed or if after cavity preparation the resultant outline form was significantly larger than the minimal classical form, RMGIC was not used; an SSC was placed instead. Stainless steel crown preparation followed conventional guidelines. The crowns were cemented with reinforced zinc oxide and eugenol (Kalzinol). The status was recorded as satisfactory restoration, tooth exfoliated, tooth extracted for orthodontic reasons with the date of extraction, or needing replacement. If replaced then the reason for replacement was also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 544 Class I RMGICs, 962 Class II RMGICs, and 1,010 SSCs were placed. At the last review of each restoration, 98.3% of Class I, 97.3% of Class II RMGICs and 97.0% of SSCs were either satisfactory or withdrawn intact. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions of private specialist practice-based study SSCs continued to prove very successful for the restoration of larger cavities and for pulp-treated primary molar teeth. For the smaller cavities RMGIC were also very successful.
AIMS: To prospectively report on the survival of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), photac-fil and pre-formed stainless steel crown (SSC) restorations in primary molar teeth placed over a seven-year period in a specialist paediatric dental practice under private contract of remuneration. METHOD: All primary molar restorations placed by a specialist paediatric dentist over a seven-year period were reviewed and the outcome results recorded. Data were recorded at review visits until June 30, 2003. Data recorded included Class I restorations, Class II restorations and SSC. The Class II cavities were either mesial or distal, with or without buccal/palatal extensions. If both proximal surfaces were decayed or if after cavity preparation the resultant outline form was significantly larger than the minimal classical form, RMGIC was not used; an SSC was placed instead. Stainless steel crown preparation followed conventional guidelines. The crowns were cemented with reinforced zinc oxide and eugenol (Kalzinol). The status was recorded as satisfactory restoration, tooth exfoliated, tooth extracted for orthodontic reasons with the date of extraction, or needing replacement. If replaced then the reason for replacement was also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 544 Class I RMGICs, 962 Class II RMGICs, and 1,010 SSCs were placed. At the last review of each restoration, 98.3% of Class I, 97.3% of Class II RMGICs and 97.0% of SSCs were either satisfactory or withdrawn intact. CONCLUSION: Under the conditions of private specialist practice-based study SSCs continued to prove very successful for the restoration of larger cavities and for pulp-treated primary molar teeth. For the smaller cavities RMGIC were also very successful.
Authors: Nicola P T Innes; David Ricketts; Lee Yee Chong; Alexander J Keightley; Thomas Lamont; Ruth M Santamaria Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2015-12-31
Authors: R R Olivoto; C E N Damiani; I Kassouf Silva; M S Lofrano-Alves; M A Oliveira; R T H Fogaça Journal: Braz J Med Biol Res Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 2.590