Literature DB >> 22192251

Correlation of clinical performance with 'in vitro tests' of restorative dental materials that use polymer-based matrices.

Stephen C Bayne1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Review correlations of in vivo clinical performance with in vitro laboratory tests of restorative dental materials involving polymer-based matrices. Identify those factors interfering with the process.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: An evidence-based dentistry approach was used to identify clinical trials, critical reviews, and meta-analyses involving correlations. Factors impacting meaningful correlations were reviewed. The limited bona fide correlations were reviewed.
RESULTS: In vitro tests include physical, chemical, mechanical, and biological properties. Clinical research measurements routinely include 10-15 categories of clinical observations of performance such as color match, caries resistance, marginal integrity, surface texture, and others, but do not correspond well with laboratory properties. Clinical trials of restorative dental materials represent a small fraction of the total research in this arena (typically <10% of dental materials research over many years). Trials are generally short-term (2-5 years) and are designed primarily to test product "safety and efficacy." A large number of risk factors (operator, design, material, intraoral location, patient) affect clinical outcomes and are not simulated well in laboratories. Little long-term information exists for clinical performance other than on composite wear. Very few meaningful correlations of laboratory tests and clinical results are demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: New studies should be focused on recovering restorations from service and characterizing them with the same tests as normally conducted in the laboratory. Many more long-term clinical trials that involve 10-20 years of observations are needed. Those trials should include planned restoration recovery to assess changes in laboratory properties of interest.
Copyright © 2011 Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22192251     DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.08.594

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dent Mater        ISSN: 0109-5641            Impact factor:   5.304


  17 in total

1.  Degradation of resin-dentine bond of different adhesive systems to primary and permanent dentine.

Authors:  F Z M Soares; T L Lenzi; R de Oliveira Rocha
Journal:  Eur Arch Paediatr Dent       Date:  2017-03-07

2.  Composition and characterization of in situ usable light cured dental drug delivery hydrogel system.

Authors:  József Bakó; Miklós Vecsernyés; Zoltán Ujhelyi; Ildikó Bácskay Kovácsné; István Borbíró; Tamás Bíró; János Borbély; Csaba Hegedűs
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 3.896

3.  Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can't predict?

Authors:  Jack L Ferracane
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 5.304

4.  Shear force comparative evaluation for surface treated and non- treated 3D interim printed materials with different types of glass-ionomer cements.

Authors:  Anna-Maria Latz; Constantin von See; Vasilios Alevizakos; Maximilian Sandmair; Ahmed Othman
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-10-01

5.  Five-year clinical performance of a silorane- vs a methacrylate-based composite combined with two different adhesive approaches.

Authors:  Bruno Baracco; M Victoria Fuentes; Laura Ceballos
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 3.573

6.  Comparison of flowable bulk-fill and flowable resin-based composites: an in vitro analysis.

Authors:  Frank Engelhardt; Sebastian Hahnel; Verena Preis; Martin Rosentritt
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-01-09       Impact factor: 3.573

7.  Three-year clinical evaluation of a two-step self-etch adhesive with or without selective enamel etching in non-carious cervical sclerotic lesions.

Authors:  Esra Can Say; Emre Özel; Haktan Yurdagüven; Mübin Soyman
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 3.573

Review 8.  Current Insights into the Modulation of Oral Bacterial Degradation of Dental Polymeric Restorative Materials.

Authors:  Ning Zhang; Yansong Ma; Michael D Weir; Hockin H K Xu; Yuxing Bai; Mary Anne S Melo
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 3.623

9.  Do Dental Resin Composites Accumulate More Oral Biofilms and Plaque than Amalgam and Glass Ionomer Materials?

Authors:  Ning Zhang; Mary A S Melo; Michael D Weir; Mark A Reynolds; Yuxing Bai; Hockin H K Xu
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2016-11-01       Impact factor: 3.623

10.  Biocompatibility of glass ionomer cements with and without chlorhexidine.

Authors:  Sultan Gulce Iz; Fahinur Ertugrul; Ece Eden; S Ismet Deliloglu Gurhan
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2013-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.