Literature DB >> 16133496

Tunnel or saucer-shaped restorations: a survival analysis.

P Hörsted-Bindslev1, B Heyde-Petersen, P Simonsen, V Baelum.   

Abstract

The aim of the present effectiveness trial was to compare the survival of restorations placed in saucer-shaped cavities to that of restorations placed in tunnel preparations. Ten operators placed a total of 85 tunnel and 97 saucer-shaped restorations. The dentinal part of the tunnel was restored by resin-modified glass ionomer cement. The remaining part of the tunnel was restored by composite resin using an adhesive technique. Composite resin was used to restore the saucer-shaped cavities. The restorations were assessed clinically and radiographically for up to 79 months, with a mean observation time of 28.8 months for tunnel, and 30.3 months for saucer-shaped restorations. The survival proportion of the tunnel restorations was 46%, and the survival proportion for the saucer-shaped restorations was 76%. A main reason for failure of the tunnel restorations was fracture of the marginal ridge (24% after 24 months). Caries development in relation to the restoration was significantly higher for tunnel restorations compared with saucer-shaped restorations (41 and 19%, respectively, after 24 months). There was no difference between the two types of restoration in marginal deterioration and caries progression in the neighboring tooth (40% after 24 months). Based on findings from the present study, it is suggested that saucer-shaped restorations should be preferred for tunnel restorations in small- and mid-sized cavities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16133496     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-005-0011-6

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


  27 in total

1.  Restorative treatment decisions on approximal caries in Norway.

Authors:  A B Tveit; I Espelid; F Skodje
Journal:  Int Dent J       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.512

2.  Durability of tunnel restorations in general practice: a three-year multicenter study.

Authors:  C E Pilebro; J W van Dijken; R Stenberg
Journal:  Acta Odontol Scand       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.331

3.  Swedish dentists' decisions on preparation techniques and restorative materials.

Authors:  H Sundberg; I Mejàre; I Espelid; A B Tveit
Journal:  Acta Odontol Scand       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.331

4.  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

5.  Tunnel restorations in permanent teeth. A 7 year follow up study.

Authors:  L Hasselrot
Journal:  Swed Dent J       Date:  1998

6.  Accuracy of radiographic detection of residual caries in connection with tunnel restorations.

Authors:  A Wenzel; H Hintze; P Hörsted-Bindslev
Journal:  Caries Res       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 4.056

7.  Variations among operators in the performance of tunnel preparations in vitro.

Authors:  G V Strand; A B Tveit; I Espelid
Journal:  Scand J Dent Res       Date:  1994-06

8.  Tunnel restorations. A 3 1/2-year follow up study of Class I and II tunnel restorations in permanent and primary teeth.

Authors:  L Hasselrot
Journal:  Swed Dent J       Date:  1993

Review 9.  Fluoride release from alternative restorative materials.

Authors:  P Hörsted-Bindslev
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Effectiveness of caries removal by the partial tunnel preparation method.

Authors:  G V Strand; A B Tveit
Journal:  Scand J Dent Res       Date:  1993-10
View more
  6 in total

1.  Tunnel Restoration: A Minimally Invasive Dentistry Practice.

Authors:  Mohammed Zahedul Islam Nizami; Conson Yeung; Iris Xiaoxue Yin; Amy Wai Yee Wong; Chun Hung Chu; Ollie Yiru Yu
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2022-07-15

2.  Minimally Invasive Intervention for Primary Caries Lesions: Are Dentists Implementing This Concept?

Authors:  Mark Laske; Niek J M Opdam; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Jozé C C Braspenning; Wil J M van der Sanden; Marie Charlotte D N J M Huysmans; Josef J Bruers
Journal:  Caries Res       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Effect of Cavity Design on the Strength of Direct Posterior Composite Restorations: An Empirical and FEM Analysis.

Authors:  V Susila Anand; C Kavitha; C V Subbarao
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2011-12-15

Review 4.  Restoring proximal caries lesions conservatively with tunnel restorations.

Authors:  Chun-Hung Chu; May L Mei; Chloe Cheung; Romesh P Nalliah
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2013-07-30

5.  Restorative treatment decisions for carious lesions: Do Russian dentists and dental students apply minimal intervention dentistry?

Authors:  Sergei N Drachev; Alexandra S Galieva; Tatiana N Yushmanova; Elena A Polivanaya; Lina Stangvaltaite-Mouhat; Rania Al-Mahdi; Jukka Leinonen; Linda Maria Stein; Nadezhda G Davidova; Mohammed Al-Haroni
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 2.757

6.  Computer Aided Design Modelling and Finite Element Analysis of Premolar Proximal Cavities Restored with Resin Composites.

Authors:  Amanda Guedes Nogueira Matuda; Marcos Paulo Motta Silveira; Guilherme Schmitt de Andrade; Amanda Maria de Oliveira Dal Piva; João Paulo Mendes Tribst; Alexandre Luiz Souto Borges; Luca Testarelli; Gabriella Mosca; Pietro Ausiello
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 3.623

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.