Literature DB >> 7495630

Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: three-year clinical results.

R W Wassell1, A W Walls, J F McCabe.   

Abstract

A clinical trial of direct composite inlays versus conventionally (incrementally) placed restorations made from the same material was started in January 1989. Restorations were randomly allocated to matched pairs of cavities. This study reports the 3-year performance of 71 of the 100 pairs of restorations placed over a 2-year period and followed-up every 6 months. Clinical assessments were made using USPHS criteria (indirect measurements of occlusal wear were made using Ivoclar standard dies) and annual bite wing radiographs. Direct inlays showed significantly less occlusal wear than conventional restorations, but the difference was small. The clinical performance of both types of restoration was similar and compared favourably with studies of other materials. No secondary decay was diagnosed. The direct inlays, however, took longer to place and did not reduce postoperative sensitivity or failure rate (8% failure of inlays and 4% of conventional composites over 3 years). Contouring of proximal and occlusal aspects was not facilitated with direct inlays but may be easier with indirect inlays on removable dies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7495630     DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4808919

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br Dent J        ISSN: 0007-0610            Impact factor:   1.626


  13 in total

1.  What type of filling? Best practice in dental restorations.

Authors:  B L Chadwick; P M Dummer; F D Dunstan; A S Gilmour; R J Jones; C J Phillips; J Rees; S Richmond; J Stevens; E T Treasure
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1999-09

2.  Composite resin fillings and inlays. An 11-year evaluation.

Authors:  Ulla Pallesen; Vibeke Qvist
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2003-05-10       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Influence of proximal box elevation on bond strength of composite inlays.

Authors:  Dayana Da Silva Gonçalves; María Cura; Laura Ceballos; Mª Victoria Fuentes
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Is it the end of the road for dental amalgam? A critical review.

Authors:  Arvind Shenoy
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2008-07

5.  Indirect composite restorations luted with two different procedures: A ten years follow up clinical trial.

Authors:  Nicola Barabanti; Alessandro Preti; Michele Vano; Giacomo Derchi; Francesco Mangani; Antonio Cerutti
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2015-02-01

6.  Influence of post-cure treatments on hardness and marginal adaptation of composite resin inlay restorations: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Laiza Tatiana Poskus; Antonio Marcelo Accetta Latempa; Maurício Alves Chagas; Eduardo Moreira da Silva; Mariana Pareira da Silva Leal; José Guilherme Antunes Guimarães
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2009 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.698

7.  Comparative evaluation of effects of bleaching on color stability and marginal adaptation of discolored direct and indirect composite laminate veneers under in vivo conditions.

Authors:  Veena Jain; Taposh K Das; Gunjan Pruthi; Naseem Shah; Suresh Rajendiran
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2015 Jan-Mar

Review 8.  Clinical performance of direct versus indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth: A systematic review.

Authors:  Rubeena Abdul Azeem; Nivedhitha Malli Sureshbabu
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2018 Jan-Feb

9.  Direct restorative treatment of missing maxillary laterals with composite laminate veneer: a case report.

Authors:  Bora Bagis; Elif Aydoğan; Yildirim H Bagis
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2008-06-13

Review 10.  Immediate Dentin Sealing: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Theodora-Kalliopi Samartzi; Dimokritos Papalexopoulos; Aspasia Sarafianou; Stefanos Kourtis
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2021-06-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.