scholarly journals Amalgam and Composite Posterior Restorations: Curriculum Versus Practice in Operative Dentistry at a US Dental School

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 524-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. E. Ottenga ◽  
I. A. Mjör
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Dental School ◽  
Operative Dentistry ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Posterior Restorations

Clinical Relevance There is an undeniable move away from amalgam towards the use of resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. The data from one dental school suggests that dental curricula are not keeping pace with the clinical shift that has occurred.

Survival rates of resin composite restorations in loadbearing situations in posterior teeth

Dental Update ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 524-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
F J Trevor Burke ◽  
Louis Mackenzie ◽  
Adrian CC Shortall
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Medline Search ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Amalgam Restorations

The use of resin composite for routine restoration of cavities in posterior teeth is now commonplace, and will increase further following the Minamata Agreement and patient requests for tooth-coloured restorations in their posterior teeth. It is therefore relevant to evaluate the published survival rates of such restorations. A Medline search identified 144 possible studies, this being reduced to 24 when inclusion criteria were introduced. Of these, ten directly compared amalgam and composite, eight were cohort studies, and six were systematic reviews. It was concluded that posterior composites may provide restorations of satisfactory longevity and with survival rates generally similar to those published on amalgam restorations. However, the ability of the operator in placing the restoration may have a profound effect. CPD/Clinical Relevance: With the increasing use of composite for restorations in posterior teeth, it is relevant to note that these may provide good rates for survival.

scholarly journals Properties of a Dental Resin Composite with a Spherical Inorganic Filler

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Lu ◽  
Y. K. Lee ◽  
M. Oguri ◽  
J. M. Powers
Keyword(s):  
Bonding Strength ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Bonding Agent ◽  
Inorganic Filler ◽  
Dental Resin ◽  
Nano Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Spherical Filler

Clinical Relevance Of the materials tested in this study, the spherical filler composite (Estelite Σ) had similar properties as the nano-composite (Filtek Supreme). Thus, Estelite Σcan be used in anterior regions and restricted posterior restorations. All the materials had a similar shrinkage pattern, in that about 99% of the shrinkage occurred prior to 24 hours; thus, for direct resin composite restorations, a strong initial bonding strength with bonding agent would be necessary.

Direct Resin Composite Restorations in Vital Versus Root-filled Posterior Teeth: A Controlled Comparative Long-term Follow-up

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 437-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Adolphi ◽  
M. Zehnder ◽  
L. M. Bachmann ◽  
T. N. Göhring
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Clinical Relevance In endodontically-treated posterior teeth, minimal direct composite restorations had a tendency to fail more often than their counterparts in vital teeth.

scholarly journals Clinical Assessment of Postoperative Sensitivity in Posterior Composite Restorations

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 421-426 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. L. F. Briso ◽  
S. R. Mestrener ◽  
G. Delício ◽  
R. H. Sundfeld ◽  
A. K. Bedran-Russo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Material Properties ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Type Size ◽  
Handling Technique ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

Clinical Relevance Posterior teeth restored with resin composite have been known to exhibit postoperative sensitivity. The type, size and design of the cavity, material properties and handling technique may influence the incidence of this sensitivity.

scholarly journals Comparison of Proximal Contacts of Class II Resin Composite Restorations In Vitro

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. A. C. Loomans ◽  
N. J. M. Opdam ◽  
F. J. M. Roeters ◽  
E. M. Bronkhorst ◽  
R. C. W. Burgersdijk
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Composite Restoration

Clinical Relevance When placing a Class II resin composite restoration, the use of sectional matrix systems and separation rings to obtain tight proximal contacts is recommended.

Gingival Microleakage of Class II Resin Composite Restorations with Fiber Inserts

10.2341/06-86 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 298-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. El-Mowafy ◽  
W. El-Badrawy ◽  
A. Eltanty ◽  
K. Abbasi ◽  
N. Habib
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Fiber Inserts

Clinical Relevance Fiber inserts incorporated at the gingival floor of Class II composite restorations resulted in a significant reduction of microleakage scores as compared to restorations made without inserts. This may lead to a reduced incidence of recurrent caries.

Factors Associated with Microleakage in Class II Resin Composite Restorations

10.2341/06-16 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Idriss ◽  
T. Abduljabbar ◽  
C. Habib ◽  
R. Omar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Gap Size ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Placement Technique

Clinical Relevance Even though marginal gap size was not shown to be a direct predictor for the extent of microleakage in resin composite restorations, both material and placement technique appear to be important determinants in microleakage and, thus, probably in clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 016-022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hande Kemaloglu ◽  
Tijen Pamir ◽  
Huseyin Tezel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Public Health Service ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the performance and postoperative sensitivity of a posterior resin composite with that of bonded amalgam in 40 (n = 20) large sized cavities and to evaluate whether resin composite could be an alternative for bonded amalgam. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial. Twenty patients in need of at least two posterior restorations were recruited. Authors randomly assigned one half of the restorations to receive bonded amalgam and the other half to composite restorations. Forty bonded amalgams (n = 20) and composites (n = 20) were evaluated for their performance on modified-US Public Health Service criteria and postoperative sensitivity using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 36-months. Results: Success rate of this study was 100%. First clinical alterations were rated as Bravo after 1 year in marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, and surface roughness for both amalgam and composite. At the 3rd year, overall “Bravo” rated restorations were 12 for bonded amalgam and 13 for resin composites. There were no significant differences among the VAS scores of composites and bonded amalgams for all periods (P > 0.05) except for the comparisons at the 3rd year evaluation (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, both resin composite and bonded amalgam were clinically acceptable. Postoperative sensitivity results tend to decrease more in composite restorations rather than amalgams. Therefore, it was concluded that posterior resin composite can be used even in large sized cavities.

scholarly journals Marginal Permeability of Self-etch and Total-etch Adhesive Systems

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. M. Owens ◽  
W. W. Johnson ◽  
E. F. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Class V ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Dentin Surface ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Surface Anatomy ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance Decreased leakage was associated with Adper Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (total etch) and iBond (self-etch) systems in Class V resin composite restorations. All adhesive systems performed best when bonded to enamel compared to dentin surface anatomy. Clinicians should be aware that strict adherence to manufacturer instructions, when using these materials, is of primary importance.

Two-year Clinical Effectiveness of Adhesives and Retention Form on Resin Composite Restorations of Non-carious Cervical Lesions

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 507-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
S-Y. Kim ◽  
K-W. Lee ◽  
S-R. Seong ◽  
M-A. Lee ◽  
I-B. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Observation Period

Clinical Relevance Over a two–year observation period, ScotchBond Multi-Purpose was found to have significantly superior marginal adaptation compared to Adper Prompt. Restorations using retention forms showed a significantly higher retention rate in an experimental adhesive and significantly less marginal discoloration in all three adhesives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document