Literature DB >> 20420058

Clinical evaluation of indirect composite restorations at baseline and 36 months after placement.

Walter Dukic1, Olga Lulic Dukic, Sladana Milardovic, Barbara Delija.   

Abstract

This study determined the differences in clinical performance between materials for indirect composite restorations based on Ormocer (Admira) and nano-hybrid resin composite (Grandio), both at baseline and 36 months after placement. Modified USPHS criteria were used to analyze the degree of quality. Marginal integrity was assessed 36 months after placement, whereupon, the restorations fabricated from Grandio achieved an Alpha 1 score of 70.7% and an Alpha 2 score of 29.3%. The Wilcoxon test revealed a statistically significant difference in the evaluation of marginal integrity (p = 0.003), anatomic form of the marginal step (p = 0.025) and discoloration of the margins (p = 0.014) at baseline and after 36 months. For Admira, the Wilcoxon test showed statistically significant differences in the evaluation of surface texture (p = 0.025), anatomic form of the complete surface (p = 0.034), anatomic form of the marginal step (p = 0.008), marginal integrity (p = 0.002) and discoloration of the margins (p = 0.008) at baseline and after 36 months. According to the number of restorations awarded the Alpha 1 score (excellent), the overall success rates for marginal integrity were 70.7% for Grandio and 71.8% for Admira; both were evaluated 36 months after placement. The results have shown that the indirect restorations were acceptable after 36 months, which indicates a 100% success rate. Over 36 months, no statistically significant differences were noted between the two materials. Indirect resin composite restorations represent a good therapy choice for severely damaged teeth.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20420058     DOI: 10.2341/09-133-C

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


  7 in total

1.  Influence of Gender on the Patient's Assessment of Restorations on the Upper Anterior Teeth.

Authors:  Ela Kristek Zorić; Maja Žagar; Dubravka Knezović Zlatarić
Journal:  Acta Stomatol Croat       Date:  2014-03

2.  Five-year retrospective clinical study of indirect composite restorations luted with a light-cured composite in posterior teeth.

Authors:  Camillo D'Arcangelo; Maciej Zarow; Francesco De Angelis; Mirco Vadini; Michele Paolantonio; Mario Giannoni; Maurizio D'Amario
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Indirect resin composites.

Authors:  Suresh Nandini
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2010-10

4.  The Effect of Polymerization and Preparation Techniques on the Microleakage of Composite Laminate Veneers.

Authors:  Neslihan Celik; Merve Iscan Yapar; Numan Taşpınar; Nilgun Seven
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep

5.  One-year clinical performance of lithium disilicate versus resin composite CAD/CAM onlays.

Authors:  Joana Souza; Mª Victoria Fuentes; Eugenia Baena; Laura Ceballos
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 2.634

6.  Clinical Longevity of Indirect Composite Resin Inlays and Onlays: An Up to 9-Year Prospective Study.

Authors:  Aristidis Galiatsatos; Panagiotis Galiatsatos; Dimitra Bergou
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2021-11-08

7.  Three-year clinical performance of two indirect composite inlays compared to direct composite restorations.

Authors:  Nurcan Ozakar-Ilday; Yahya-Orcun Zorba; Mehmet Yildiz; Vildan Erdem; Nilgun Seven; Sezer Demirbuga
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2013-05-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.