J Liberman1, R Franzon2, L F Guimarães3, L Casagrande3, A N Haas4, F B Araujo3. 1. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Universidad de la Republica, Montevideo, Uruguay. 2. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: renatafranzon@hotmail.com. 3. Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. 4. Periodontology, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the survival of composite restorations after selective (SCR) or total caries removal (TCR) and determine predictors of failures after 36 months. METHODS: 120 teeth with deep occlusal or occlusal-proximal carious lesions were randomly divided into control (TCR; n = 54; 69% Class II) and test (SCR; n = 66; 63% Class II) groups. Clinical evaluation was applied using the USPHS criteria, and the presence of Charlie or Delta scores at the marginal integrity were considered as a failure. RESULTS: The overall survival rate of restorations was 68% after 36 months, 81% for TCR and 57% for SCR (p = 0.004). The multivariable Cox Regression model demonstrated that restorations performed after SCR had 3.44 times greater probability of failure compared to TCR (p = 0.006). The other two predictors for failure of restorations were teeth with Class II cavities (hazard ratio = 3.3) and children with gingival bleeding over 20% (hazard ratio = 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Performing composite restorations after SCR in primary teeth had success rate significantly lower than restorations performed after TCR. Complex cavities and worst patient´s oral hygiene were found to be predictors of failure of restorations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Although SCR has been demonstrating high rates of pulp preservation, clinicians should consider that composite restorations fail in a higher frequency compared to TCR in primary teeth and, in some circumstances, may be preferable in terms of restoration longevity.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the survival of composite restorations after selective (SCR) or total caries removal (TCR) and determine predictors of failures after 36 months. METHODS: 120 teeth with deep occlusal or occlusal-proximal carious lesions were randomly divided into control (TCR; n = 54; 69% Class II) and test (SCR; n = 66; 63% Class II) groups. Clinical evaluation was applied using the USPHS criteria, and the presence of Charlie or Delta scores at the marginal integrity were considered as a failure. RESULTS: The overall survival rate of restorations was 68% after 36 months, 81% for TCR and 57% for SCR (p = 0.004). The multivariable Cox Regression model demonstrated that restorations performed after SCR had 3.44 times greater probability of failure compared to TCR (p = 0.006). The other two predictors for failure of restorations were teeth with Class II cavities (hazard ratio = 3.3) and children with gingival bleeding over 20% (hazard ratio = 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Performing composite restorations after SCR in primary teeth had success rate significantly lower than restorations performed after TCR. Complex cavities and worst patient´s oral hygiene were found to be predictors of failure of restorations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Although SCR has been demonstrating high rates of pulp preservation, clinicians should consider that composite restorations fail in a higher frequency compared to TCR in primary teeth and, in some circumstances, may be preferable in terms of restoration longevity.
Authors: S Amend; C Boutsiouki; K Bekes; D Kloukos; S Gizani; N N Lygidakis; R Frankenberger; N Krämer Journal: Eur Arch Paediatr Dent Date: 2022-09-03
Authors: Falk Schwendicke; Tanya Walsh; Thomas Lamont; Waraf Al-Yaseen; Lars Bjørndal; Janet E Clarkson; Margherita Fontana; Jesus Gomez Rossi; Gerd Göstemeyer; Colin Levey; Anne Müller; David Ricketts; Mark Robertson; Ruth M Santamaria; Nicola Pt Innes Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-07-19