Literature DB >> 18505215

Increasing the longevity of restorations by minimal intervention: a two-year clinical trial.

Gustavo Moncada1, Eduardo Fernández, Javier Martín, Carolina Arancibia, Ivar A Mjör, Valeria V Gordan.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: This investigation assessed the effectiveness of alternative treatments for the replacement of amalgam and resin-based composite restorations. Sixty-six patients (age 18 to 80 years, mean = 26.6) with 271 (amalgam [n = 193] and resin-based composite [n = 78]) defective restorations were randomly assigned to one of five different treatment groups: A) Repair (n = 27); B) Sealing of margins (n = 48); C) Refurbishing (n = 73); D) Replacement (n = 42) and E) Untreated (n = 81). USPHS/Ryge criteria were used to determine the quality of the restorations. Two calibrated examiners (Cohen's Kappa 0.74) assessed the restorations independently at the beginning of the study (baseline) and at two years after treatment using seven parameters from the USPHS/Ryge criteria (Marginal Adaptation, Anatomic Form, Roughness, Marginal Stain, Occlusal Contact, Secondary Caries and Luster).
RESULTS: Two-hundred and fifty-six restorations (178 amalgam and 78 resin-based composite) were examined at the two-year recall exam. The sealing of marginal defects showed significant improvements in marginal adaptation (p < 0.05). Refurbishing of the defective restorations significantly improved anatomic form (p < 0.0001), luster (p < 0.016), marginal adaptation (p < 0.003) and roughness (p < 0.0001). The repair significantly improved anatomic form (p < 0.002) and marginal stain (p < 0.002). Replacement showed significant improvements for all parameters (p < 0.05). The Untreated group showed significant deterioration on marginal adaptation (p < 0.013).
CONCLUSIONS: The two-year recall examination showed that sealant, repair and refurbishing treatments improved the clinical properties of defective amalgam and resin-based composite restorations by increasing the longevity of the restorations with minimal intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18505215     DOI: 10.2341/07-113

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


  15 in total

1.  Repairing ditched amalgam restorations is less time and tooth structure-consuming than replacement.

Authors:  T L Lenzi; M Marquezan; G C Bonini; L B Camargo; D P Raggio
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2013-10-02

2.  Influence of ozone on the composite-to-composite bond.

Authors:  Elisa Magni; Marco Ferrari; Federica Papacchini; Reinhard Hickel; Nicoleta Ilie
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  The clinical success of repaired posterior composite restorations with and without silane application.

Authors:  Muhittin Ugurlu; Fatmanur Sari
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 3.606

4.  Risk of failure of repaired versus replaced defective direct restorations in permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Laura Teixeira Mendes; Djessica Pedrotti; Luciano Casagrande; Tathiane Larissa Lenzi
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.606

5.  Effects of different light curing units/modes on the microleakage of flowable composite resins.

Authors:  A Ruya Yazici; Cigdem Celik; Berrin Dayangac; Gul Ozgunaltay
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2008-10

6.  Repair vs replacement of failed restorations in general dental practice: factors influencing treatment choices and outcomes.

Authors:  H Javidi; M Tickle; V R Aggarwal
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 1.626

7.  Management of Class I and Class II Amalgam Restorations with Localized Defects: Five-Year Results.

Authors:  Javier Martin; Eduardo Fernandez; Juan Estay; Valeria V Gordan; Ivar Andreas Mjör; Gustavo Moncada
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2013-01-28

8.  The effect of re-bonding using surface sealant or adhesive system on microleakage of class V resin composite restorations.

Authors:  Mostafa Sadeghi; Abdolrahim Davari; Christopher D Lynch
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2013-09

Review 9.  Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite.

Authors:  Mohammad O Sharif; Melanie Catleugh; Alison Merry; Martin Tickle; Stephen M Dunne; Paul Brunton; Vishal R Aggarwal; Lee Yee Chong
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-02-08

Review 10.  Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: amalgam.

Authors:  Mohammad O Sharif; Alison Merry; Melanie Catleugh; Martin Tickle; Paul Brunton; Stephen M Dunne; Vishal R Aggarwal; Lee Yee Chong
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-02-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.