Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations

Reinhard Hickel, Juergen Manhart, Franklin Garcia-Godoy

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

69 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To (1) review the literature and analyze the longevity and reasons for failure of direct resin-based composite (RBC), amalgam, and glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in stress-bearing posterior cavities and (2) to assess new material developments and treatment techniques to restore these cavities. Materials and Methods: This work reviewed the dental literature predominately of the last decade for longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies. Only studies investigating the clinical performance of restorations in permanent teeth were included. Annual failure rates of direct resin-based composite, amalgam, and GIC restorations were determined and failure reasons were discussed. Results: Annual failure rates in posterior stress-bearing cavities were determined to be: 0-9% for direct RBC restorations, 0-7% for amalgam restorations, and 1.9-14.4% for GIC restorations. The median annual failure rate of longitudinal studies for amalgam was calculated with 1.1%, for RBCs 2.1% and for GICs 7.7%. GIC is significantly worse compared with amalgam and RBC. Main reasons for failure were secondary caries, marginal deficiencies, fracture, and wear. Longitudinal studies showed a strong trend towards a higher longevity compared with cross-sectional investigations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalAmerican journal of dentistry
Volume13
Issue number5 SPEC. ISS.
StatePublished - Nov 1 2000

Fingerprint

Glass Ionomer Cements
Composite Resins
Longitudinal Studies
Tooth
Cross-Sectional Studies
Clinical Studies

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations. / Hickel, Reinhard; Manhart, Juergen; Garcia-Godoy, Franklin.

In: American journal of dentistry, Vol. 13, No. 5 SPEC. ISS., 01.11.2000.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ba15eb74f1724594a172d71c0c0de79c,
title = "Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations",
abstract = "Purpose: To (1) review the literature and analyze the longevity and reasons for failure of direct resin-based composite (RBC), amalgam, and glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in stress-bearing posterior cavities and (2) to assess new material developments and treatment techniques to restore these cavities. Materials and Methods: This work reviewed the dental literature predominately of the last decade for longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies. Only studies investigating the clinical performance of restorations in permanent teeth were included. Annual failure rates of direct resin-based composite, amalgam, and GIC restorations were determined and failure reasons were discussed. Results: Annual failure rates in posterior stress-bearing cavities were determined to be: 0-9{\%} for direct RBC restorations, 0-7{\%} for amalgam restorations, and 1.9-14.4{\%} for GIC restorations. The median annual failure rate of longitudinal studies for amalgam was calculated with 1.1{\%}, for RBCs 2.1{\%} and for GICs 7.7{\%}. GIC is significantly worse compared with amalgam and RBC. Main reasons for failure were secondary caries, marginal deficiencies, fracture, and wear. Longitudinal studies showed a strong trend towards a higher longevity compared with cross-sectional investigations.",
author = "Reinhard Hickel and Juergen Manhart and Franklin Garcia-Godoy",
year = "2000",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "5 SPEC. ISS.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations

AU - Hickel, Reinhard

AU - Manhart, Juergen

AU - Garcia-Godoy, Franklin

PY - 2000/11/1

Y1 - 2000/11/1

N2 - Purpose: To (1) review the literature and analyze the longevity and reasons for failure of direct resin-based composite (RBC), amalgam, and glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in stress-bearing posterior cavities and (2) to assess new material developments and treatment techniques to restore these cavities. Materials and Methods: This work reviewed the dental literature predominately of the last decade for longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies. Only studies investigating the clinical performance of restorations in permanent teeth were included. Annual failure rates of direct resin-based composite, amalgam, and GIC restorations were determined and failure reasons were discussed. Results: Annual failure rates in posterior stress-bearing cavities were determined to be: 0-9% for direct RBC restorations, 0-7% for amalgam restorations, and 1.9-14.4% for GIC restorations. The median annual failure rate of longitudinal studies for amalgam was calculated with 1.1%, for RBCs 2.1% and for GICs 7.7%. GIC is significantly worse compared with amalgam and RBC. Main reasons for failure were secondary caries, marginal deficiencies, fracture, and wear. Longitudinal studies showed a strong trend towards a higher longevity compared with cross-sectional investigations.

AB - Purpose: To (1) review the literature and analyze the longevity and reasons for failure of direct resin-based composite (RBC), amalgam, and glass-ionomer cement (GIC) restorations in stress-bearing posterior cavities and (2) to assess new material developments and treatment techniques to restore these cavities. Materials and Methods: This work reviewed the dental literature predominately of the last decade for longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies. Only studies investigating the clinical performance of restorations in permanent teeth were included. Annual failure rates of direct resin-based composite, amalgam, and GIC restorations were determined and failure reasons were discussed. Results: Annual failure rates in posterior stress-bearing cavities were determined to be: 0-9% for direct RBC restorations, 0-7% for amalgam restorations, and 1.9-14.4% for GIC restorations. The median annual failure rate of longitudinal studies for amalgam was calculated with 1.1%, for RBCs 2.1% and for GICs 7.7%. GIC is significantly worse compared with amalgam and RBC. Main reasons for failure were secondary caries, marginal deficiencies, fracture, and wear. Longitudinal studies showed a strong trend towards a higher longevity compared with cross-sectional investigations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0034329513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0034329513&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 13

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 5 SPEC. ISS.

ER -