Clinical performance of indirect composite resin inlays/onlays in a dental school: Observations up to 34 months

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

Volumn 57, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 216-220

  Leirskar, Jakob ^a   Henaug, Turid ^a   Thoresen, Nina Rygh ^a   Nordbø, Hakon ^a   Von Der Fehr, Frithjof Ramm ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Class II restorations; Clinical trial; Dental materials; Esthetic restorations; Operative dentistry

Indexed keywords

DENTIN BONDING AGENT; MAXXIM; RESIN; SILICON DIOXIDE; TETRIC; Z100 COMPOSITE RESIN; ZIRCONIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DENTAL STUDENT; DENTAL SURGERY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; PREMOLAR TOOTH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICS; TIME; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; BICUSPID; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INLAYS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NORWAY; RADIOGRAPHY, BITEWING; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SILICON DIOXIDE; STUDENTS, DENTAL; TIME FACTORS; ZIRCONIUM;

EID: 0033174129     PISSN: 00016357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/000163599428805     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Lutz F, Krejci I, Barbakow F. The importance of proximal curing in posterior composite resin restorations. Quintessence Int 1992;23:605-9.
2. Burke FJT, Watts DC, Wilson NHF, Wilson MA. Current status and rationale for composite inlays and onlays. Br Dent J 1991;170:269-73.
3. Bausch JR, de Lange C, Davidson CL. The influence of temperature on some physical properties of dental composites. J Oral Rehabil 1981;8:309-17.
4. Wendt SL Jr. The effect of heat used as secondary cure upon the physical properties of three composite resins. II. Wear, hardness, and color stability. Quintessence Int 1987;18:351-6.
5. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Mechanical properties of heat treated restorative resins for use in the inlay/onlay technique. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98:564-7.
6. Robinson PB, Moore BK, Swartz ML. Comparison of microleakage in direct and indirect composite resin restorations in vitro. Oper Dent 1987;21:113-6.
7. Douglas WH, Fields RP, Fundingsland J. A comparison between the microleakage of direct and indirect composite restorative systems. J Dent 1989;17:184-8.
8. Sheth PJ, Jensen ME, Sheth JJ. Comparative evaluation of three resin inlay techniques: microleakage studies. Quintessence Int 1989;20:831-6.
9. Wassell RW, Walls AWG, McCabe JF. Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: three-year clinical results. Br Dent J 1995;179:343-9.
10. Wassel RW, Walls AWG, van Vogt-Crothers AJR, McCabe JF. Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: Five year follow-up [Abstract 2254]. J Dent Res 1998;77: 913.
11. van Dijken, JWV. A 6-year evaluation of a direct composite resin inlay/onlay system and glass ionomer cement-composite resin sandwich restorations. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52:368-76.
12. van Dijken JWV, Hørstedt P. Marginal breakdown of 5-year-old direct composite inlays. J Dent 1996;24:389-94.
13. Pallesen U, Qyist V. Clinical evaluation of resin fillings and inlays: 8-year report [Abstract 2257]. J Dent Res 1998;77:914.
14. Ryge G. Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 1980;30:347-58.
15. Nordbø H, Leirskar J, von der Fehr KR. Saucer-shaped cavity preparations for posterior approximal resin composite restorations: observations up to 10 years. Quintessence Int 1998;29:5-11.
16. Neiva IF, de Andrada MAC, Baratieri LN, Monteiro S Jr, Ritter AV. An in vitro study of the effect of restorative technique on marginal leakage in posterior composites. Oper Dent 1998;23: 282-9.
17. Lutz F, Krejci I, Luescher B, Oldenburg TR. Improved proximal margin adaptation of Class II composite resin restorations by use of light-reflecting wedges. Quintessence Int 1986;17:659-64.
18. Lutz F, Krejci I, Barbakow F. Restoration quality in relation to wedge-mediated light channeling. Quintessence Int 1992;23: 763-7.
19. Høglund Åberg C, van Dijken JWV, Olofsson A-L. Three-year comparison of fired ceramic inlays cemented with composite resin or glass ionomer cement. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52: 140-9.
20. Sjøgren G, Molin M, van Dijken JWV. A 5-year clinical evaluation of ceramic inlays (Cerec) cemented with a dual-cured or chemically cured resin composite luting agent. Acta Odontol Scand 1998;56:263-7.
21. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. A comparison of accuracy in seating and gap formation for three inlay/onlay techniques. Oper Dent 1990;15:129-35.
22. Krejci I, Güntert A, Lutz F. Scanning electron microscopic and clinical examination of composite resin inlays/onlays up to 12 months in situ. Quintessence Int 1994;25:403-9.
23. Scheibenbogen A, Manhart J, Kunzelmann K-H, Hickel R. One-year clinical examination of composite and ceramic inlays in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80:410-6.
24. Pallesen U, Qvist V. Clinical evaluation of three resin materials for fillings and inlays: 2-year report [Abstract 1626]. J Dent Res 1992;71:719.