Conservative interproximal box-only polyacid modified composite restorations in primary molars, twelve-month clinical results

Journal of Dentistry for Children

Volumn 66, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 23-29

  Marks, Luc A M ^a,b   Van Amerongen, W Evert ^a   Kreulen, Cees M ^a   Weerheijm, Karin L ^a   Martens, Luc C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Cavity preparation; Dyract; Tytin

Indexed keywords

COMPOMER; DENTAL ALLOY; DYRACT; GLASS IONOMER; METHACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; RESIN; SILICATE; TYTIN;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECIDUOUS TOOTH; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

CHILD; COMPOMERS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL ALLOYS; DENTAL AMALGAM; DENTAL CARE FOR CHILDREN; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); METHACRYLATES; MOLAR; SILICATES; TOOTH, DECIDUOUS;

EID: 0032611089     PISSN: 15518949     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Mount G.J.: Minimal treatment of carious lesion. Int Dent J, 41:55-59, February 1991.
2. Welbury, R.R.; Walls, A.W.G.; Murray, J.J.: The management of caries in deciduous molars. 5-year results of a clinical trial comparing a glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement restoration with an amalgam restoration. Br Dent J, 170:177-181, March 1991.
3. Surmont, P.; Martens, L.; D'Hauwers, R.: A decision tree for the treatment of caries in posterior teeth. Quint Int, 21:239-246, March 1990.
4. Kreulen, C.M.; van Amerongen, W.E.; Akerboom, H.B.M. et al: A clinical study on direct and indirect Class II posterior composite resin restorations. Design of the investigation. J Dent Child, 58:231-288, July-August 1991.
5. Forsten L. and Karjalainen, S.: Glass ionomers in proximal cavities of primary molars. Scand J Dent Res, 98:70-73, February 1990.
6. Croll, T.P.; Kilian, C.M.; Helpin, M.L.: A restorative dentistry renaissance for children: Light-hardened glass ionomer/resin cement. J Dent Child, 60:89-94, March-April 1993.
7. Wilson and McLean: Glass ionomer cements. Quint Int Spec. edit. 1988.
8. Forsten, L.: Clinical experience with glass ionomer for proximal fillings. Acta Odont Scand, 51:195-200, August 1993.
9. Fuks, A.B.; Shapiro, J.; Bielak, S.: Clinical evaluation of glass-ionomer cement used as a class II restorative material in primary molars. J Pedod, 8:393-399, Summer 1984.
10. Hasselrot, L.: Tunnel restorations. A 3.5 year follow-up study of class I and II tunnel restorations in permanent and primary teeth. Swed Dent J, 17:173-182, October 1993.
11. McLean, J.W.; Gasser, O.: Glass-Cermet cements. Quint Int, 16:333-343, 1985.
12. Beyls, H.M.M.F.; Verbeeck, R.M.H.; Martens, L.C. et al: Compressive strength of some polyalkenoates with or without dental amalgam alloy incorporation. Dent Mater, 7:151-154, July 1991.
13. Engelmann, U.; Kocher, Th.; Albers, H.K.: Vergleichende Langzeituntersuchung über die füllingsmaterialien Ketac Fil und Amalgam an Milchzahnen. Dtsch Zahnartztl Z, 43:291-294, March 1988.
14. Hickel, R. and Voss, A.: A comparison of glass cermet cement and amalgam restorations in primary molars. J Dent Child, 57:184-188, May-June 1990.
15. Hung, T.W. and Richardson, A.S.: Clinical evaluation of glass ionomer-silver restorations in primary molars: One year results. J Can Dent Assoc, 56:239-240, March 1990.
16. Arends, J. and Dijckman, G.E.H.M.A.G.: Review of fluoride release and secondary caries reduction by fluoridating composites. Adv Dent Res, 9:367-376, 1995.
17. York, A.K. and Arthur, J. S.: Reasons for placement and replacement of dental restorations in the U.S. Navy dental corps. Oper Dent, 18:203-205, September-October 1993.
18. Svanberg, M.: Class II amalgam restorations, Glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: A 3-year clinical study. Caries Res, 26:315-318, July-August 1992.
19. Verbeeck, R.M.H.; De Maeyer, E.A.P.; Marks, L.A.M. et al: The fluoride release process of glass ionomer cements versus resin modified cements and polyacid modified composite resins. Biomaterials, 19:509-519, March 1998.
20. Gladys, S.; Van Meerbeeck, B.; Bream, M. et al: Comparative physico mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials. J Dent Res, 76:883-894, April 1997.
21. Attin, T.; Vataschki, M.; Hellwig, E.: Properties of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials and two poly-acid modified resin composite materials. Quint Int, 27:203-209, March 1996.
22. Ostlund, J.; Moller, K.; Koch, G.: Amalgam, composite resin and glass ionomer cement in class II restorations in primary molars-a three year evaluation result. Swed Dent J, 16:81-86, June 1992.
23. Peters, T.C.R.B.; Roeters J.J.M.; Frankenmolen, F.W.A.: Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 1-year results. Am J Dent, 9:83-87 April 1996.
24. Hse, K.M. and Wei, S.H.: Clinical evaluation of compomer in primary teeth: 1-year results. JADA, 128:1088-1096, August 1997.
25. Andersson-Weckert, I.E.; Folkesson, U.H.; van Dijken, J.W.: Durability of a polyacid modified composite resin (compomer) in primary molars. A multi center study. Acta Odont Scan 55:255-260, August 1997.
26. Kreulen, C.M.; van Amerongen, W.E.; Akerboom, H.B.M. et al: Two years result with box-only resin composite restorations. J Dent Child, 62:395-400, November-December 1995.
27. Mason, P.N. and Ferrari, M.: In vivo evaluation of glass ionomer adhesion to dentine. Quint Int, 499-504, July 1994.
28. Forsten, L.: Fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement. Scand J Dent Res, 85:503-504, September 1977.
29. DeMoor, R.J.G.; Verbeeck, R.M.H.; Demaeyer, E.A.P.: Fluoride release profiles of restorative glass ionomer formulations. Dent Mater, 12:88-95, 1996.
30. Retief, D.H.; Bradley, E.L.; Denton, J.C. et al: Enamel and cementum fluoride uptake from a glass ionomer cement. Caries Res, 18:250-257, March 1984.
31. Weerheijm, K.L.; de Soet, J.J.; van Amerongen, W.E. : The effect of glass ionomer cement on carious dentine: an in vivo study. Caries Res, 27:417-423, September-October 1993.
32. Sasanaluckit, P.; Albustany, K.R.; Doherty, P.J. et al: Biocompatibility of glass ionomer cements. Biomat, 14:906-916, October 1993.
33. Hume, W.R. and Mount, G.J.: In vitro studies on the potential for pulpal cytotoxity of glass-ionomer cements. J Dent Res, 67:915-918, June 1988.
34. Svanberg, M.; Mjor, I.; Orsravik, D.: Mutans streptococci in plaque from margins of amalgam, composite and glass-ionomer restorations. J Dent Res, 69:861-864, March 1990.
35. Kreulen, C.M., van Amerongen, W.E.; Borgmeijer, P.J. et al: Evaluation of occlusal marginal adaption of class II resin composite inlays. J Dent Child, 61:29-31, January-February 1994.
36. Feilzer, A.J.; Kakaboura, I.; De Gee, A.J. et al: The influence of water sorption on the development of the setting shrinkage stress in traditional and resin modified glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater, 11:186-190, May 1995.
37. Anstice, H.M. and Nicholson, J.W. :Studies on the structure of light-cured glass-ionomer cements. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 3:447-451, 1992.
38. Pelka, M.; Ebert, J.; Schneider, H. et al: Comparison of two- and three-body wear of glass ionomers and composites. Eur J Oral Sciences, 104:132-137, April 1996.
39. Van Dijken, J.W.V.: Three-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin modified glass-ionomer and a resin composite in class III restorations. Am J Dent, 9:195-198, October 1996.
40. Rudolphy, M.P.; Gorter, Y.; van Loveren, C. et al: Validity of radiographs for diagnosis of secondary caries in teeth with class II amalgam restorations in vitro. Caries Res, 31:24-29, January 1997.