Françoise H van de Sande1, Rafael R Moraes1, Raquel V Elias1, Anelise F Montagner2, Paulo A Rodolpho3, Flávio F Demarco1,4, Maximiliano S Cenci1. 1. Programa de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil. 2. Programa de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Rua Marechal Floriano Peixoto, 1184, Santa Maria, RS, 97015-372, Brazil. animontag@gmail.com. 3. Clínica Odontológica, Av. Duque de Castilhos, 1348, s. 203, Caxias do Sul, RS, 95010-000, Brazil. 4. Programa de Pós-graduação em Epidemiologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Rua Marechal Deodoro, 1160, Pelotas, RS, 96020-220, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the impact in survival, when repair is seen as failure or not, in anterior composite restorations with a retrospective 15-year follow-up study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was collected from patients' files of a private dental practice, including patients with direct composite restorations placed in anterior teeth (class III, class IV, or veneer) between January 1994 and December 2009. Data were analyzed considering or not repair as failure. Statistical analysis was performed with log rank test, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression (p < .05). RESULTS: One hundred forty-four patients' files were included, with 634 restorations. At 15 years, Class III / IV restorations showed 69% survival and 2.4% annual failure rate (AFR) when repair was not considered as failure, and 64% and 2.9% AFR, respectively, when repair was seen as failure. For direct veneers, at 5 and 10 years of follow-up, survival dropped from 85% to 74% and from 52% to 38% respectively, when repair was considered as failure. In general, restorations placed in the upper jaw showed increased risk for failure compared to the lower jaw (p < .01), and restorations in central incisors presented a higher risk for failure compared to canines (p < .01). CONCLUSION: Composite repair seems a suitable alternative for class III, class IV, and veneer restorations since it was able to increase the survival of restorations performed in anterior teeth. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Composite repair for anterior restorations is a suitable restorative treatment option and presents benefits over replacement, including the preservation of sound tooth structures, reduced clinical chair time, and patient anxiety.
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the impact in survival, when repair is seen as failure or not, in anterior composite restorations with a retrospective 15-year follow-up study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was collected from patients' files of a private dental practice, including patients with direct composite restorations placed in anterior teeth (class III, class IV, or veneer) between January 1994 and December 2009. Data were analyzed considering or not repair as failure. Statistical analysis was performed with log rank test, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression (p < .05). RESULTS: One hundred forty-four patients' files were included, with 634 restorations. At 15 years, Class III / IV restorations showed 69% survival and 2.4% annual failure rate (AFR) when repair was not considered as failure, and 64% and 2.9% AFR, respectively, when repair was seen as failure. For direct veneers, at 5 and 10 years of follow-up, survival dropped from 85% to 74% and from 52% to 38% respectively, when repair was considered as failure. In general, restorations placed in the upper jaw showed increased risk for failure compared to the lower jaw (p < .01), and restorations in central incisors presented a higher risk for failure compared to canines (p < .01). CONCLUSION: Composite repair seems a suitable alternative for class III, class IV, and veneer restorations since it was able to increase the survival of restorations performed in anterior teeth. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Composite repair for anterior restorations is a suitable restorative treatment option and presents benefits over replacement, including the preservation of sound tooth structures, reduced clinical chair time, and patientanxiety.
Authors: Flávio Renato Reis de Moura; Ana Regina Romano; Rafael Guerra Lund; Evandro Piva; Sinval Adalberto Rodrigues Júnior; Flávio Fernando Demarco Journal: Braz Dent J Date: 2011
Authors: Paulo A Da Rosa Rodolpho; Tiago A Donassollo; Maximiliano S Cenci; Alessandro D Loguércio; Rafael R Moraes; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Niek J M Opdam; Flávio F Demarco Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2011-07-16 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Sheila Regina Maia Braga; Beatriz Tholt Vasconcelos; Manoel Roberto de Paula Macedo; Vinicius R Geraldo Martins; Maria Angela Pita Sobral Journal: Quintessence Int Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 1.677
Authors: Jan P Vandenbroucke; Erik von Elm; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Cynthia D Mulrow; Stuart J Pocock; Charles Poole; James J Schlesselman; Matthias Egger Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2007-10-16 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Verônica P Lima; Luuk A M J Crins; Niek J M Opdam; Rafael R Moraes; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Marie-Charlotte D N J M Huysmans; Bas A C Loomans Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 3.606