Three-year clinical performance of a compomer in stress-bearing restorations in permanent posterior teeth

American Journal of Dentistry

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 255-258

  Huth, Karin Christine ^a   Manhard, Jürgen ^a   Hickel, Reinhard ^a   Kunzelmann, Karl Heinz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CALCIUM HYDROXIDE; COMPOMER; GLASS IONOMER; HYTAC; RESIN;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; COTTON; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL EQUIPMENT; DENTAL SURGERY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MECHANICAL STRESS; MOLAR TOOTH; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; PATHOLOGY; PREMOLAR TOOTH; SURFACE PROPERTY;

BICUSPID; CALCIUM HYDROXIDE; COMPOMERS; COMPOSITE RESINS; COTTON FIBER; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CAVITY LINING; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; MOLAR; RUBBER DAMS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

EID: 0642340988     PISSN: 08948275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Meyer JM, Cattani-Lorente MA, Dubuis V. Compomers: Between glass ionomer cements and composites. Biomaterials 1998; 19: 529-539.
2. Berg JH. The continuum of restorative materials in pediatric dentistry - A review for the clinician. Pediatr Dent 1998; 20: 93-100.
3. Croll TP. Alternatives to silver amalgam and resin composite in pediatric dentistry. Quintessence Int 1998; 29: 697-703.
4. Hse KMY, Leung SK, Wei SHY. Resin-ionomer restorative materials for children: A review. Austr Dent J 1999; 44: 1-11.
5. Hickel R. Glass ionomers, cermets, hybrid-ionomers and compomers - (long-term) clinical evaluation. Trans Acad Dent Mater 1996; 9: 105-129.
6. Hickel R. Modern filling materials. .Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1997; 52: 572-585. (In German)
7. Small ICB, Watson TF, Chadwick AV, Sidhu SK. Water sorption in resin-modified glass-ionomer cements: An in vitro comparison with other materials. Biomat 1998; 19: 545-550.
8. Martin N, Jedynakiewicz N. Measurement of water sorption in dental composites. Biomat 1998; 19: 77-83.
9. Armstrong SR, Seol J, Boyer DB. Fracture toughness of direct tooth-colored restorative materilas. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 207 (Abstr 811).
10. El-Kalla IH, García-Godoy F. Mechanical properties of compomer restorative materials. Oper Dent 1999; 24: 2-8.
11. Gladys S, van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Comparative physico-mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glassionomer and resin composite restorative materials. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 883-894.
12. Krämer N, Pelka M, Kautetzky P, et al. Wear resistance of new compomers and condensable glass ionomer cements. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1997; 52: 186-189. (In German)
13. Peutzfeldt A. Compomers and glass ionomers: Bond strength to dentin and mechanical properties. Am J Dent 1996; 9: 259-263.
14. Peutzfeldt A, García-Godoy F, Asmussen E. Surface hardness and wear of glass ionomers and compomers. Am J Dent 1997; 10: 15-17.
15. El-Kalla ICH, García-Godoy F. Bond strength and interfacial micromorphology of compomers in primary and permanent teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 1998; 8: 103-114.
16. García-Godoy F, Rodriguez M, Barberia E. Dentin bond strength of fluoride-releasing materials. Am J Dent 1996; 9: 80-82.
17. Kielbassa AM, Wrbas K-Th, Schaller H-G, et al. Bond strength of compomers to differently contaminated enamel. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1999; 54: 202-206. (In German)
18. Hickel R, Dasch W, Janda R, Tyas M, Anusavice K. New direct restorative materials. Int Dent J 1998; 48: 3-16.
19. Frey O, Soglowek W. Correlation of abrasion resistance and mechanical properties of compomers. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 75 (Abstr 495).
20. De Gee AJ, Feilzer AJ, Werner A, et al. Wear performance of polyacid modified resin composites. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 74 (Abstr 486).
21. Dullin P, Manhart J, Ilie N, et al. Fracture toughness of polyacid-modified composite resins. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 205 (Abstr 1353).
22. Manhart J, Ilie N, Dullin P, et al. Flexural mechanical properties of compomer materials. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 204 (Abstr 1350).
23. Schuh H, Richter R, Watts DC. Shear bond strength of a compomer adhesive system to hard dental tissues. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 314 (Abstr 2401).
24. Gross LC, Griffen AL, Casamassimo PS. Compomers as class II restorations in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 2001; 23: 24-27.
25. Roeters JJM, Frankenmolen F, Burgersdijk RCW, Peters TCRB. Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results. Am J Dent 1998; 11: 143-148.
26. Krejci I, Wiedmer CS, Lutz F. Clinical, radiographic and SEM evaluation of compomer restorations in deciduous teeth after 2 years. Acta Med Dent Helv 1998; 3: 48-53. (In German) Acta Med Dent Helv 1998; 3: 48-53.
27. Marks LAM, Weerheijm KL, van Amerongen WE, Groen HJ, Martens LC. Dyract versus Tytin class II restorations in primary molars: 36 months evaluation. Caries Res 1999; 33: 387-892.
28. Papagiannoulis L, Kakaboura A, Pataleon F, Kawadia K. Clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) in class II restorations of primary teeth: A two year follow-up study. Pediatr Dent 1999; 21: 231-234.
29. Manhart J, Hickel R. Esthetic compomer restorations in posterior teeth using a new all-in-one adhesive: case presentation. J Esthet Dent 1999; 11: 250-258.
30. Höhnk HD, Hannig M. Dental materials with potential: compomers & co. Phillip J Restorative Zahnmed 1998; 15: 264-269.
31. Shaw AJ, Carrick T, McCabe JF. Fluoride release from glass-ionomer and compomer restorative materials: 6 months data. J Dent 1998; 26: 355-359.
32. Li D, Manhart J, Fay RM, et al. Color stability of composites, compo-mers and ormocer by staining. Trans Acad Dent Mater 1998; 12: 235 (Abstr P33).
33. Benz C, Stabel W, Mehl A, et al. Clinical evaluation of modified glass ionomers in class II restorations. J Dent Res 1997; 76: 165 (Abstr 1209).
34. Kontou E, Frankenberger R, Klinge S, et al. Clinical performance of two compomer materials: six months follow-up. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 391 (Abstr 2283).
35. Krämer N, Rügheimer S, Kontou E, et al. Posterior performance of two compomers after two years. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 200 (Abstr 1315).
36. Manhart J, Glomb C, Stückgen D, et al. Clinical evaluation of a self-etching adhesive at 6 months. J Dent Res 2000; 79: 273 (Abstr 1033).
37. Manhart J, Glomb C, Stückgen D, et al. Clinical evaluation of a self-etching adhesive at 1 year. J Dent Res 2001; 80: 65 (Abstr 238).
38. Leinfelder KF. Evaluation of criteria used for assessing the clinical preformance of composite resins in posterior teeth. Quintessence Int 1987; 18: 531-536.
39. Ryge G, Cvar JF. Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. US Dental Health Center, San Francisco: US Government: Printing Office 1971; Publication No. 7902244.
40. Ryge G, Snyder M. Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent 1973; 87: 369-377.
41. Ryge G, Stanford JW. Recommended format for protocol of clinical research program. Clinical comparison of several anterior and posterior restorative materials. Int Dent J 1977; 27: 46-57.
42. Ryge G. Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 1980; 30: 347-358.
43. ADA American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. Acceptance Program Guidelines Restorative Materials, March 1996.
44. Li D, Powers JM. Bond strength of compomers with acidic primers to human enamel. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 445 (Abstr 2719).
45. Breschi L, Perdigão J, Mazzotti G, et al. Ultramorphology and shear bond strength of self-etching adhesives on enamel. J Dent Res 1999; 78: 475 (Abstr 2957).
46. Ferrari M, Mannocci F, Kugel G, García-Godoy F. Standardized microscopic evaluation of the bonding mechanism of NRC/Prime & Bond NT. Am J Dent 1999; 12: 77-83.
47. Haller B, Moll K, Hofmann N, et al. Initial shear bond strength of glass ionomer composite hybrid materials at conditioned and unconditioned enamel. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1997; 52: 680-684. (In German)
48. Freilich MA, Goldberg AJ, Gilpatrick RO, Simonsen RJ. Direct and indirect evaluation of posterior composite restorations at three years. Dent Mater 1992; 8: 60-64.
49. Wassell RW, Walls AWG, McCabe JF. Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: three-year clinical results. Br Dent J 1995; 179: 343-349.
50. Manhart J, Neuerer P, Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, Fuchsbrunner A, Hickel R. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2000; 84: 289-296.
51. Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: survival after 3 years. Comm Dent Oral Epidem 1998; 26: 372-381.
52. Mallow PK, Durward CS, Klaipo M. Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Camdodia using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique and Fuji II glass.ionomer cement. Int J Paediatr Dent 1998; 8: 35-40.
53. Hickel, R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhesive Dent 2001; 3: 45-64.