Posterior resin-based composite: Review of the literature

Pediatric Dentistry

Volumn 24, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 465-479

  Burgess, J O ^a   Walker, Richard ^a   Davidson, J M ^a  

^a LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY   (United States)

Author keywords

Literature review; Pediatric restorative dentistry; Resin based composite

Indexed keywords

COMPOMER; RESIN;

CHEMISTRY; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; PREMOLAR TOOTH; REVIEW;

BICUSPID; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIALS; COMPOMERS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CARE FOR CHILDREN; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; HUMANS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MOLAR;

EID: 0036719746     PISSN: 01641263     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (171)

1. Lutz F, I Krejci. Amalgam subsitutes: A critical analysis. J Esthet Dent. 2000 12:146-157.
2. Burgess JO. Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach. 2nd ed. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2001:337-385.
3. Burgess JO. et al. Directly placed esthetic restorative materials - the continuum. Compendium. 1997; 17:731-748.
4. Burgess JO. BK Norling, J Summit. Resin ionomer restorative materials: the new generation. J Esthet Dent. 1994;6:207-215.
5. Burkett L, et al. Flouride release of glass ionomers coated and not coated with adhesive. J Dent Res. 1993;72:258.
6. Alvarez A, JO Burgess, D Chan. Short-term flouride release of 6 ionomers - recharged, coated, and abraded. J Dent Res. 1994;73:134.
7. Iazzetti G, JO Burgess, D Gardiner. Selected mechanical properties of fluoride-releasing materials. Oper Dent. 2001;26:21-26.
8. Iazzetti G, et al. Color stability of flouride containing materials. Oper Dent. 2000;25:520-525.
9. Jedynakiewicz N, Martin N, F JM. A three-year evaluation of a compomer restorative. J Dent Res. 1997;76:162.
10. Suh B, et al. The effect of pulse delay curing technique on residual strain in composites. Compend Cont Ed. 1999; 20:4-12.
11. Peutzfeld A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci. 1997;105:97-116.
12. Manhart J, et al. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light-cured packable composite resins. Dent Mat. 2000;16:33-40.
13. Hickel R, et al. New direct filling matererials. Int Dent J. 1998;48:3-16.
14. Combe EC, Burke FJT. Contemporary resin-based composite materials for direct placement restorations: packables, flowables, and others. Dent Up. 2000;27: 326-336.
15. Albers HF. Tooth-Colored Restoratives. 8th ed. Santa Rosa; 1996:5b-2.
16. Hosoya Y. Five-year color changes of light-cured resin composites: influence of light-curing times. Dent Mat. 1999;15:353-362.
17. Dietschi D, et al. Comparison of the color stability of ten new-generation composites: An in vitro study. Dent Mat. 1994;10:353-362.
18. Stansbury JW. Curing dental resins and composites by photopolymerization. J Esthet Dent 2000;12:300-308.
19. Albers HF. Resin polymerization. ADEPT Report. 2000;6(3).
20. Ferracane J, Greener E, The effect of resin formulation on the degree of conversion and the mechanical properties of dental restorative resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 1986;20:121-131.
21. Rees J, Jacobsen P. The polymerization shrinkage of resin composites. Dent Mat. 1989;77:41-44.
22. Puckett A, Smith R. Method to measure the polymerization shrinkage of light-cured composites. J Prosth Dent. 1992;68:56-58.
23. Lai J, Johnson A. Measuring polymerization shrinkage of photoactivated restorative materials by a water-filled dilatometer. Dent Mat. 1993;9:139-143.
24. Davidson C, De Gee A, Feilzer A. The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res. 1984; 63:1396-1399.
25. Suliman A, Boyer DB, Lakes RS. Polymerization shrinkage of composite resins: comparison with tooth deformation. J Prosth et Dent. 1994;71:7-12.
26. Feilzer A, de Gee A, Davidson C. Setting stress in composite in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res. 1987;66:1636-1639.
27. Alster D, et al. Influence of compliance of the substrate materials on polymerization contraction stress in thin resin composite layers. Biomaterials. 1997;18:337-341.
28. Braga R, Ferracane J. Contraction stress related to degree of conversion and reaction kinetics. J Dent Res. 2002;81:114-118.
29. Ferracane J. Materials in Dentistry: Materials and Applications. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Lippincott; 2001.
30. Bayne S, Taylor D. Dental materials. In: Sturdevant C, ed. The Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. St. Louis: Mosby; 1995.
31. Willems G, et al. A classification of dental composites according to their morphological and mechanical characteristics. Dent Mat. 1992;8:310-319.
32. Leinfelder K, et al. Quantitative wear measurement of posterior composite resins. Dent Mat. 1986;2:198-201.
33. Council on Dental Materials, Instruments and Devices, American Dental Association, Specification No. 27 for Resin-based filling materials. 1993, Chicago: American Dental Association. 226d.
34. Craig R, Powers J. Restorative Dental Materials, 11th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002:243.
35. Espelid I, et al. Radiopacity of restorations and detection of secondary caries. Dent Mat. 1991;7:114-117.
36. Tolbert S, et al. Radiopacity of flowable and posterior dental composites. J Dent Res. 2002;81 (special issue):A-258.
37. Sakaguchi R, et al. Strain gauge method for measuring polymerization contraction of composite restoratives. J Dent. 1991;19:312-316.
38. Ciucchi B, et al. Volume of the internal gap formed under composite restorations in vitro. J Dent. 1997;25:305-312.
39. Borgmeijer P, et al. The prevalence of post operative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations. ASDC J Dent Child. 1991;58:378-383.
40. Condon J, Ferracane J. Assessing the effect of composite formulation on polymerization stress. JADA. 2000;131:497-503.
41. Davidson C, Feilzer A. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent. 1997;25:435-440.
42. Bouschlicher M, Vargas M, Boyer D. Effect of composite type, light intensity, configuration factor and laser polymerization on polymerization contraction forces. Am J Dent. 1997;10:88-96.
43. Eick J, Welch F. Polymerization shrinkage of posterior composite resins and its possible influence on postoperative sensitivity. Quintessence Int. 1986; 17:103-111.
44. Sheth J, Fuller J, Jensen M. Cuspal defprmation and fracture resistance for teeth with dentin adhesives and composites. J Pros Dent. 1988;60:560-569.
45. Versluis A, Tantbiroin D, Douglas W. Two-component properties-complex for interfacial toothrestoration stresses [abstract #3542]. J Dent Res. 1999;78:548.
46. Davidson C, de Gee A. Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow in dental composites. J Dent Res. 1984;63:146-148.
47. Versluis A, Tantbirojn D, Douglas W. Do dental composites always shrink toward the light? J Dent Res. 1998;77:1435-1445.
48. Feilzer A, de Gee A, Davidson C. Quantitative determination of stress reduction by flow in composite restorations. Dent Mat. 1990;6:167-171.
49. Yoshikawa T, et al. Effects of dentin depth and cavity configuration on bond strength. J Dent Res. 1999; 78:895-905.
50. Choi K, Condon J, Ferracane J. The effects of adhesive thickness on polymerization contraction stress of composite. J Dent Res. 2000;79:812-817.
51. Davidson C. Glass ionomer bases under posterior composites. J Esthet Dent. 1994;6:223-224.
52. Kemp-Scholte C, Davidson C. Complete marginal seal of Class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res. 1990;69:1240-1243.
53. Krejci I, Lutz F. Marginal adaptation of Class V restorations using different restorative techniques. J Dent. 1991;19:24-32.
54. Dijken van J. A 6-year clinical evaluation of a direct composite resin inlay/onlay system and glass ionomer cement-composite resin sandwich restorations. Acta Odontol Scand. 1994;52:368-376.
55. George L, Richards N, Eichmiller F. Reduction on marginal gaps in composite restorations by use glass -ceramic inserts. Oper Dent. 1995;29:151-154.
56. Liberman R, et al. Marginal seal of composite inlays using different polymerization techniques. J Oral Rehab. 1997;24:26-29.
57. Fusayama T. Indications for self-cured and light-cured adhesive composite resins. J Prosthet Dent. 1992;67:46-51.
58. Garberoglio R, Coli P, Brannstrom M. Contraction gaps in Class II restorations with self-cured and light-cured composite resins. Am J Dent. 1995;8:303-307.
59. Huron T, Schwartz R, Ferracane J. Microleakage of four Class II resin composite insertion techniques at intraoral temperature. Quintessence Int. 1997;28:135-144.
60. Dijken van J, Horstedt P, Waern R. Directed polymerization shrinkage versus a horizontal incremental filling technique: Interfacial adaptation in vivo in Class II cavities. Am J Dent. 1998;11:165-172.
61. Rueggeberg F, Caughman W, Curtis J. Effect of intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composite. Oper Dent. 1994;19:26-32.
62. Goracci G, Mori G, de'Martinis L. Curing light intensity and marginal leakage of resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int. 1996;27:355-362.
63. Uno S, Asmussen E. Marginal adaptation of a restorative resin polymerized at reduced rate. Scand J Dent Res. 1991;99:440-444.
64. Feilzer A, et al. Influence of light intensity on polymerization shrinkage and integrity of restoration-cavity interface. Eur J Oral Sci. 1995;103:322-326.
65. Mehl A, Hickel R, Kunzelmann K. Physical properties and gap formation of light-cured composites with and without 'soft start polymerization.' J Dent. 1997;25:321-330.
66. Kanca J, Suh B. Pulse activation: Reducing resin-based composite contraction stresses at the enamel cavosurface margins. Am J Dent. 1999;12:107-112.
67. Sakaguchi R, Karren D. Microleakage of posterior composite as a function of curing light intensity [abstract #1256]. J Dent Res. 1997.
68. García-Godoy F, Puppin Rontani R. Interfacial adaptationof resins cured with a dual intensity light curing unit [abstract #2972]. J Dent Res. 1999;78:477.
69. Walker R, Burgess J. Microleakage of Class V composite restorations with different visible-light-curing methods [abstract #397]. J Dent Res. 1999;78:155.
70. Friedl K, et al. Marginal adaption of class V restorations with and without 'softstart polymerization.' Oper Dent. 2000;25:26-32.
71. Smith M, Burgess JO, Xu X. Microleakage of Class I composite restorations cured with three methods. J Dent Res. 2001;80(special issue):197.
72. Manuel N, et al. Microleakage of Class I composite resin restorations cured with 4 curing methods. J Dent Res. 2001;80(special issue):197.
73. McCabe, Walls. 1998.
74. Davidson C, de Gee A. Light-curing units, polymerization, and clinical implications. J Adhes Dent. 2000;2:167-173.
75. Yearn J. Factors affecting cure of visible light activated composites. Int Dent J. 1985;35:218-225.
76. Caughman W, Rueggeberg F, Curtis J. Clinical guidelines for photocuring restorative resins. JADA. 1995; 126:1280-1286.
77. Fleming M, Maillet W. Photopolymerization of composite resin using the Argon laser. J Can Dent Assoc. 1999;65:447-450.
78. Price R, Murphy D, Derand T. Light transmission through resin composite and human dentin. Quintessence Int. 2000;31:659-667.
79. Burgess JO, et al. An evaluation of four light-curing units comparing soft and hard curing. Pract Periodont Aesthet Dent. 1999;11:125-132.
80. Hofmann N, et al. Comparison between plasma arc light source and conventional halogen curing units regarding flexural strength, modulus, and hardness of photoactivated resin composites. Clin Oral Invest. 2000;4:140-147.
81. Lloyd C, Joshi A, McGlynn E. Temperature rises producted by light sources and composites during curing. Dent Mat. 1986;2:170-174.
82. Zach L, Cohen G. Pulp response to externally applied heat. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Path. 1965;19:515-530.
83. Goodis H, et al. Measurement of temperature generated by visible-light lamps: an in vitro model. Dent Mat. 1989;5:230-234.
84. Hannig M, Bott B. In vitro pulp chamber temperature rise during composite resin polymerization with various light-curing sources. Dent Mat. 1999;15:275-281.
85. Moseley H, Strang R, Stephen K. An assessment of visible-light polymerizing sources. J Oral Rehab. 1986;13:215-222.
86. Pires J, et al. Effects of curing tip distance on light intensity and composite resin microhardness. Quintessence Int. 1993;24:517-521.
87. Hansen E, Asmussen E. Visible-light curing units:correlation between depth of cure and distance between exit window and resin surface. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997;55:162-166.
88. McCullock A, Smith B. In vitro studies of cuspal movement produced by adhesive restorations. Br Dent J. 1986;161:405-409.
89. Suliman A, Boyer D, Lakes R. Cusp movement in premolars resulting from composite polymerization shrinkage. Dent Mat. 1993;9:6-10.
90. Winkler M, Katona T, Paydar N. Finite elemental stress analysis of three filling techniques for class V light-cured composite restorations. J Dent Res. 1996;75:1477-1483.
91. Mangnum F, Berry E, Deschepper EAA. Microleakage of incremental vs compression matrix bulk filling of cervical resin restorations. Gen Dent. 1994;42:304-308.
92. Versluis A, Douglas W, Cross MEA. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res. 1996;75: 871-878.
93. Jedrychowski J, Bleier R, Caputo A. Shrinkage stresses associated with incremental composite filling techniques. ASDC J Dent Child. 1998;65:111-115.
94. Belvedere P. Contemporary posterior direct composites using state-of-the-art techniques. Dent Clin N Am. 2001;45(1):49-59.
95. Neo J, Denehy G, Boyer D. Effects of polymerization techniques on uniformity of cure of large-diameter, photoinitiated composite restorations. JADA. 1986; 113:905-909.
96. Miyazaki M, Hattori T, Ichishi Y, et al. Evaluation of curing units used in private dental practice. Oper Dent. 1984;23:50-54.
97. Bargi N, Berry E, Hatton C. Evaluating intensity output of curing lights in private dental offices. JADA. 1994;125:992-996.
98. Unterbrink G, Muessner R. Influence of light intensity on two restorative systems. J Dent. 1995; 23:183-189.
99. Fowler C, Schwartz M, Moore B. Efficacy testing of visible-light-curing units. Oper Dent. 1994;19:47-52.
100. Murchison D, Charlton D, Moore W. Comparative radiopacity of flowable resin composites. Quintessence Int. 1999;30:179-184.
101. Bayne S, et al. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. JADA. 1998;129:567-577.
102. Xu X, et al. In vitro wear and toothbrush abrasion of flowable and posterior dental composites. J Dent Res. 2002;81 (special issue):A-258.
103. Yau L, Perry R, Kugel G. Three body wear of lightcured flowable composites [abstract #3276]. J Dent Res. 1997;76:423.
104. Dang H, Sarrett D. Wear behavior of flowable and condensable composite resins [abstract #2736]. J Dent Res. 1999;78.
105. Beznos C. Microleakage at the cervical margin of composite class II cavities with different restorative techniques. Oper Dent. 2001;26:60-69.
106. Belli S, et al. The effect of additional enamel etching and a flowable composite to the interfacial integrity of class II adhesive composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2001;26:70-75.
107. Leevailoj C, et al. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent. 2001;26:302-307.
108. Jain P, Belcher M. Microleakage of Class II resin-based composite restorations with flowable composite resin in the proximal box. Am J Dent. 2000;13:235-238.
109. Small BW. A method for maximum clinical control of contacts, aesthetics, and longevity. Dent Today. 1997;March:60-65.
110. Bouschlicher M, Cobb D, Boyer D. Radiopacity of compomer, flowable and conventional resin composites for posterior restorations. Oper Dent. 1999;24:20-25.
111. Nash RW, Lowe RA, Leinfelder K. Using packable composites for direct posterior placement. JADA. 2001;132:1099-1104.
112. Leinfelder K, Bayne S, Swift E. Packable composites: overview and technical considerations. J Esthet Dent. 1999;11:234-249.
113. CRA. Condensable restorative resins. In: Clin Res Assoc Newsletter. 1998;1.
114. Brackett W, Covey D. Resistance to condensation of "condensable" resin composites by a mechanical test. Oper Dent. 2000;25:424-426.
115. Bagby M, et al. Interproximal contacts of packable composites [abstract #2440]. J Dent Res. 2000;79:448.
116. Peumans M, et al. Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts? Dent Mat. 2001; 17:533-541.
117. Manhart J, Chen H, Hickel R. The suitability of packable resin-based composites for posterior restorations. JADA. 2001;132:639-645.
118. Suzuki S. In vitro wear of condensable resin composite restoratives [abstract]. J Dent Res. 1999;78:447.
119. Knobloch L, Kirby R, Seghi R. Wear resistance of posterior condensable resins [abstract]. J Dent Res. 1999;78(special issue).
120. Ruddell D, et al. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of condensable composites [abstract]. J Dent Res. 1999;78(special issue):156.
121. Barkmeier W, et al. In vitro wear assessment of high density composite resins [abstract #2737]. J Dent Res. 1999;78:448.
122. Winkler M, Xu X, Burgess J. In vitro contact wear of 8 posterior resin composites [abstract #1082]. J Dent Res. 2000;79:279.
123. Perry R, Kugel G, Aboushala A. Two-year clinical evaluation of a high-density posterior restorative [abstract #158]. J Dent Res. 2000;79:163.
124. Cobb D, et al. The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites-, a comparison. JADA. 2000;131:1610-1615.
125. Cardoso P, et al. Surface roughness of condensable and hybrid resins [abstract #1079]. J Dent Res. 2000;79:278.
126. Choi K, et al. Properties of packable dental composites. J Esthet Dent. 2000;12:216-226.
127. Powell JM, Allen LJ, Graig RG. In vitro wear response of composite resin, amalgam and enamel. J Dent Res. 1975;54:1183.
128. Harrison A. Effect of packing pressure on abrasion resistance of dental amalgams. J Dent Res. 1977;56:613.
129. Harrison A, Draugh RA. Abrasive wear, tensile strength and hardness of dental composite resins - is there a relationship? J Prosthet Dent. 1976;36:395.
130. de Gee AJ, Pallav P. Occlusal wear simulation with the ACTA wear machine. J Dent. 1994;22(suppl):321.
131. de Gee AJ, Pallav P, Davidson CL. Effect of abrasive medium on wear of stress-bearing composites and amalgam in vitro. J Dent Res. 1986;65:654.
132. De Long R, Douglas W. Development of an artificial environment for the testing of dental restoratives; biaxial force and movement control. J Dent Res. 1983;62:32.
133. Finger W, Thiemann J. Correlation between in vitro and in vivo wear of posterior restorative materials. Dent Mat. 1987;3:280-286.
134. Suzuki S, Leinfelder K. Localized wear and marginal integrity of posterior resin composites. Am J Dent. 1993;6:199-203.
135. Lutz F, Phillips RN, Roulet JF. In vivo and in vitro wear of posterior composites. J Dent Res. 1984;63:914.
136. Barkmeier W, et al. Evaluation of a generalized wear model for composites. J Dent Res. 2002;81 (special issue A):A-470.
137. Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Evaluation of clinical performance for posterior composite resins and dentin adhesives. Oper Dent. 1984;12:53-78.
138. Mair L. Wear patterns in 2 amalgams and 3 posterior composite resins after 5 years clinical service. J Dent. 1995;23:107-112.
139. Lugassy AA, Moffa JP. Laboratory model for the quantification of clinical occlusal wear. J Dent Res. 1985;64:181.
140. Perry R, et al. Composite restoration wear analysis: conventional methods vs three-dimensional laser digitizer. JADA. 2000;131:1472-1477.
141. Williams D, et al. Laser techniques for the evaluation of wear in Class II restorations. J Oral Rehab. 1983;10: 407-414.
142. De Long R, Douglas W. A methodology for the measurement of occlusal wear using computer graphics. J Dent Res. 1983;2:456.
143. Willems G, et al. Three-year follow-up of five posterior composites: in vivo wear. J Dent. 1993;21(2):74-78.
144. Randall R, Wilson N. Clinical testing of restorative materials: some historical landmarks. J Dent. 1999;27:543-550.
145. Phillips RW, et al. Observations on a composite resin for Class II restorations: three-year report. J Prosthet Dent. 1973;30:891-897.
146. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3:45-64.
147. Mjör IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997;55:58-63.
148. Mjör IA. Amalgam and composite resin restorations longevity and reasons for replacement. In: Anusavice K, ed. Quality Evaluation of Dental Restorations. Chicago: Quintessence. 1989;61-80.
149. Oldenburg, TR, Vann WF, Dilley DC. Comparison of composite and amalgam in posterior teeth of children. Dent Mat. 1987;3:182-186.
150. Oldenburg TR, Vann WF, Dilley DC. Composite restorations for primary molars: results after 4 years. Pediatr Dent. 1987;9:136-143.
151. Wilson N. A clinical trial of a visible light cured posterior composite resin restorative material: five-year results. Quintessence Int. 1988;19:675-681.
152. Letzel H. Survival rates and reasons for failure of posterior composite restorations in multicentre clinical triai. J Dent. 1989;17(suppl 1):S10-S17.
153. Smales RJ, Gerke DC, White IL. Clinical evaluation of occlusal glass ionomer, resin, and amalgam restorations. J Dent. 1990;18:243-249.
154. Welbury RR, et al. The management of occlusal caries in permanent molars. A 5-year clinical trial comparing minimal composite with an amalgam restoration. Br Dent J. 1990;169:361-366.
155. Barnes DM, et al. A 5-and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int. 1991;22:143-151.
156. Barr-Agholme M., et al. A 2-year clinical study of lightcured composite and amalgam restorations in primary molars. Dent Mat. 1991;7:230-233.
157. Wendt SL, K Leinfelder. Clinical evaluation of Clearfil Photoposterior: 3-year results. Am J Dent. 1992;5:121-125.
158. Freilich MA, et al. Direct and indirect evaluation of posterior composite restorations at three years. Dent Mat. 1992;8:60-64.
159. Mjör IA, Jokstad A Five-year study of Class II restorations in permanent teeth using amalgam, glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cermet, and resin-based composite materials. J Dent. 1993;21:338-343.
160. Dickinson, GL, Gerbo LR, Leinfelder K. Clinical evaluation of a highly wear resistant composite. Am J Dent. 1993;6(2):85-87.
161. Wassell RW, Walls AWG, McCabe JF. Direct composite inlays vs conventional composite restorations: 3-year clinical results. Br Dent J. 1995;179:343-349.
162. Geurtsen W, Schoeler U. A 4-year retrospective clinical study of Class I and Class II composite restorations. J Dent. 1997;25:229-232.
163. Mair L. Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and 2 amalgams. Quintessence Int. 1998;29:483-490.
164. Vann WF, Barkmeier W, Mahler DB. Assessing composite resin wear in primary molars: 4-year findings. J Dent Res. 1988;67:876-879.
165. Raskin A, et al. Clinical evaluation of a posterior composite 10-year report. J Dent. 1999;27:13-19.
166. Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, et al. Two-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 82:391-397.
167. Wilder AD, et al. Seventeen-year clinical study of ultraviolet-cured posterior composite Class I and II restorations. J Esthet Dent. 1999;11:135-142.
168. Manhart J, et al. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84:289-296.
169. Attin T, et al. Three-year follow up assessment of Class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite. Am J Dent. 2001;14:148-152.
170. Paquette D, et al. Modified cavity preparations for composite resins in primary molars. Pediatr Dent. 1983;5:246-251.
171. Oldenburg TR, Vann WF, Dilley DC. Composite restorations for primary molars: 2-year results. Pediatr Dent. 1985;7:96-103.