KACD
Articles
- Page Path
- HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 27(3); 2002 > Article
- Original Article 1 year follow-up study of direct and indirect composite restorations
- Sung-Ho Park
-
2002;27(3):-289.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.3.284
Published online: May 31, 2002
Associate Professor, Yonsei University, Seoul, Korea.
Copyright © 2002 Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
- 272 Views
- 3 Download
- 1 Crossref
Abstract
-
Background The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the direct and indirect composite restorations which had been placed for 1 year.
-
Methods The composite restorations which had been placed between 1999. Mar and 1999, Dec was evaluated after 1 year. For direct restorations, Spectrum (Dentsply, USA) and Z100 (3M, USA) were used in the anterior teeth and Surefil (Dentsply, USA) were used. For class V restorations of anterior and posterior teeth, Spectrum was used. For indirect restorations, Targis/Vectris system (Vivadent/Ivoclar, Liechtenstein) was used. 2 examiners evaluated marginal quality, proximal contact, discoloration, presence of 2nd caries, loss of filling and hypersensitivity of restorations. The restorations was clinically evaluated by modified methods based on USPHS.
-
Results 60 teeth were evaluated. 59 were clinically acceptable and 1 restoration which was placed in class v cavity in the posterior tooth was fallen out. In most cases, the restorations were clinically acceptable. For restorations which had been directly placed in the class II cavities, loose proximal contact was indicated as the main complaints.
-
Conclusions Most of Anterior and posterior restorations which bad been directly or indirectly placed for 1 year were clinically acceptable. For posterior teeth, loose proximal contact was indicated as the main problem in the directly placed Class II restorations. Long term clinical study is needed.
- 1. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Thompson VP, Holston AM, Gingell JC. A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int. 1991;22: 143-151.PubMed
- 2. Wilson NHF, Margaret AW, Wastell DG, Smith GA. A clinical trial of a visible light cured posterior composite resin restorative materials: five-year results. Quintessence Int. 1988;19: 675-681.PubMed
- 3. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Willems G, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Clinical and semiquantitative amrgin analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years. J Dent. 1995;23: 329-338.PubMed
- 4. Bessing C, Lundqvist P. A 1 year clinical examination of indirect composite resin inlay: a preliminary report. Quintessence Int. 1991;22: 153-157.PubMed
- 5. Browning WD, Dennison JB. A survey of failure modes in composite resin restorations. Oper Dent. 1996;21: 160-166.PubMed
- 6. Powell LV, Johnson GH, Gordon GE. Factors associated with clinical success of cervical abrasion/erosion restoration. Oper Dent. 1995;20: 7-13.PubMed
- 7. Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Two-year clinical evaluation of two dentine-adhesive systems in cervical lesion. J Dent. 1993;21: 195-202.PubMed
- 8. Fuks AB, chosack A, Eidelman E. A Two-year evaluation in vivo and in vitro of class 2 composites. Oper Dent. 1990;15: 219-223.PubMed
REFERENCES
Tables & Figures
REFERENCES
- 1. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Thompson VP, Holston AM, Gingell JC. A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int. 1991;22: 143-151.PubMed
- 2. Wilson NHF, Margaret AW, Wastell DG, Smith GA. A clinical trial of a visible light cured posterior composite resin restorative materials: five-year results. Quintessence Int. 1988;19: 675-681.PubMed
- 3. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Inokoshi S, Willems G, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Clinical and semiquantitative amrgin analysis of four tooth-coloured inlay systems at 3 years. J Dent. 1995;23: 329-338.PubMed
- 4. Bessing C, Lundqvist P. A 1 year clinical examination of indirect composite resin inlay: a preliminary report. Quintessence Int. 1991;22: 153-157.PubMed
- 5. Browning WD, Dennison JB. A survey of failure modes in composite resin restorations. Oper Dent. 1996;21: 160-166.PubMed
- 6. Powell LV, Johnson GH, Gordon GE. Factors associated with clinical success of cervical abrasion/erosion restoration. Oper Dent. 1995;20: 7-13.PubMed
- 7. Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Two-year clinical evaluation of two dentine-adhesive systems in cervical lesion. J Dent. 1993;21: 195-202.PubMed
- 8. Fuks AB, chosack A, Eidelman E. A Two-year evaluation in vivo and in vitro of class 2 composites. Oper Dent. 1990;15: 219-223.PubMed
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by 
- Effec of different zirconia primers on shear bond strengths of composite resin to bonded zirconia
Hong-Bing Shi, Tae-Seok Kim, Jae-Seok Ahn, Jung-Hwan Lee
Journal of Korean Acedemy of Dental Technology.2016; 38(3): 135. CrossRef
ePub Link
Cite
XML Download1 year follow-up study of direct and indirect composite restorations
1 year follow-up study of direct and indirect composite restorations
Teeth examined at recall
Evaluation lists for anterior teeth
Evaluation list for posterior teeth
Performance of the restorations for anterior teeth reviewed after 12 months in clinical service
Performance of the restorations for posterior teeth reviewed after 12 months in clinical service
Table 1
Teeth examined at recall
Table 2
Evaluation lists for anterior teeth
Table 3
Evaluation list for posterior teeth
Table 4
Performance of the restorations for anterior teeth reviewed after 12 months in clinical service
Table 5
Performance of the restorations for posterior teeth reviewed after 12 months in clinical service
