Literature DB >> 18297828

Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations.

Niek J M Opdam1, Ewald M Bronkhorst, Joost M Roeters, Bas A C Loomans.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate longevity and reasons for failure of Class II posterior composite restorations (PCRs) placed with or without a lining of glass-ionomer cement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred fifty-eight Class II PCR placed in 248 patients (110 male, 138 female, age 18 to 80) by two dentists in a general practice between 1988 and 1997 were retrospectively examined from the patient files. The restorations were placed either with a total-etch technique or with a resin-modified glass-ionomer lining placed on the dentin. Items recorded were date of placement, date of last check-up visit, tooth number, and restored surfaces. Date of replacement and reason for failure of the PCR was recorded. A restoration was clinically acceptable when still in function and acceptable at the last check-up visit. Additionally, the caries risk for each patient was estimated by the treating clinician. Life tables and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to express survival rates. A Cox regression was applied to assess the influence of variables on survival.
RESULTS: Three hundred seventy-six total-etch PCRs and 82 PCRs with a lining were investigated. After 9 years, survival percentages of 88.1% for total-etch restorations and 70.5% for restorations with a resin-modified glass-ionomer lining were found. The most important reasons for failure were fracture and caries. Predominantly, failures started occurring after 3 to 4 years of clinical service. Results of the Cox regression show that the presence of a lining and high risk for caries significantly increased the failure rate of the restorations.
CONCLUSION: PCRs placed with a resin-modified glass-ionomer lining clinically showed more frequent fractures than PCRs placed with a total-etch technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18297828

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Adhes Dent        ISSN: 1461-5185            Impact factor:   2.359


  20 in total

1.  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

2.  Longevity and associated risk factors in adhesive restorations of young permanent teeth after complete and selective caries removal: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Luciano Casagrande; Alejandra Tejeda Seminario; Marcos Britto Correa; Stefanie Bressan Werle; Marisa Maltz; Flávio Fernando Demarco; Fernando Borba de Araujo
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Risk factors for failure in the management of cervical caries lesions.

Authors:  R J Wierichs; E J Kramer; H Meyer-Lueckel
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Does a new formula have an input in the clinical success of posterior composite restorations? A chat study.

Authors:  Sevil Gurgan; Uzay Koc Vural; Zeynep Bilge Kutuk; Filiz Yalcin Cakir
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Knowledge and attitudes of general dental practitioners towards posterior composite restorations in northern saudi arabia.

Authors:  Iftikhar Akbar
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-02-01

Review 6.  Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  N J M Opdam; F H van de Sande; E Bronkhorst; M S Cenci; P Bottenberg; U Pallesen; P Gaengler; A Lindberg; M C D N J M Huysmans; J W van Dijken
Journal:  J Dent Res       Date:  2014-07-21       Impact factor: 6.116

7.  Is it the end of the road for dental amalgam? A critical review.

Authors:  Arvind Shenoy
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2008-07

8.  A prospective 8-year follow-up of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth of children and adolescents in Public Dental Health Service: reasons for replacement.

Authors:  Ulla Pallesen; Jan W V van Dijken; Jette Halken; Anna-Lena Hallonsten; Ruth Höigaard
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-07-20       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  A 24-month evaluation of amalgam and resin-based composite restorations: Findings from The National Dental Practice-Based Research Network.

Authors:  Michael S McCracken; Valeria V Gordan; Mark S Litaker; Ellen Funkhouser; Jeffrey L Fellows; Douglass G Shamp; Vibeke Qvist; Jeffrey S Meral; Gregg H Gilbert
Journal:  J Am Dent Assoc       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.634

10.  Characterization of methacrylate-based composites containing thio-urethane oligomers.

Authors:  Atais Bacchi; Morgan Nelson; Carmem S Pfeifer
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 5.304

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.