Clinical performance of posterior compomer restorations over 4 years

American Journal of Dentistry

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 61-66

  Krämer, Norbert ^a,b   García Godoy, Franklin ^c   Reinelt, Christian ^a   Frankenberger, Roland ^b  

^a University of Erlangen Nuremberg ^*

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^c NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETONE; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; COMPOMER; DYRACT; GLASS IONOMER; HYTAC; POLYMETHACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; PRIME AND BOND 2.1; RESIN;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURFACE PROPERTY; SURVIVAL;

ACETONE; ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COMPOMERS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; MALE; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MIDDLE AGED; POLYMETHACRYLIC ACIDS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 33645533103     PISSN: 08948275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Busato AL, Loguercio AD, Reis A, de Oliveira Carrilho MR. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 6-year results. Am J Dent 2001; 14:304-308.
2. Wilson NH, Cowan AJ, Unterbrink G, Wilson MA, Crisp RJ. A clinical evaluation of Class II composites placed using a decoupling technique. J Adhes Dent 2000;2:319-329.
3. Marks LA, Weerheijm KL, van Amerongen WE, Groen HG, Martens LC. Dyract versus Tytin Class II restorations in primary molars: 36 months evaluation. Caries Res 1999;33:387-392.
4. Köhler B, Rasmusson C-G, Ödman P. A five-year clinical evaluation of class II composite resin restorations. J Dent 2000;28:111-116.
5. Krejci I, Besek M, Lutz F. Clinical and SEM study of Tetric resin composite in posterior teeth: 12-months results. Am J Dent 1994;7:325-331.
6. el-Kalla IH, Garcia-Godoy F. Mechanical properties of compomer restorative materials. Oper Dent 1999;24:2-8.
7. Latta MA, Barkmeier WW, Wilwerding TM, Blake SM. Localized wear of compomer restorative materials. Am J Dent 2001;14:238-240.
8. Vercruysse CW, De Maeyer EA, Verbeeck RM. Fluoride release of polyacid-modified composite resins with and without bonding agents. Dent Mater 2001;17:354-358.
9. Peutzfeldt A. Compomers and glass ionomers: Bond strength to dentin and mechanical properties. Am J Dent 1996;9:259-263.
10. Barnes D, Blank L, Thompson V, Holston AM, Gingell JC. A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int 1991;22:143-151.
11. Roeters JJ, Frankenmolen F, Burgersdijk RC, Peters TC. Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results. Am J Dent 1998;11:143-148.
12. Gross LC, Griffen AL, Casamassimo PS. Compomers as Class II restorations in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 2001;3:24-27.
13. Cehreli ZC, Altay N. Three-year clinical evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite in minimally invasive occlusal cavities. J Dent 2000;28:117-122.
14. Rosa BT, Perdigão J. Bond strengths of nonrinsing adhesives. Quintessence Int 2000;31:353-358.
15. Tate WH, You C, Powers JM. Bond strength of compomers to human enamel. Oper Dent 2000;5:283-291.
16. Frankenberger R, Perdigão J, Rosa BT, Lopes M. No-bottle vs. multi-bottle adhesives. A microtensile and morphological study. Dent Mater 2001; 17:373-380.
17. Ryge G, Cvar JF. Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. United States Dental Health Center, US Government Printing Office, San Francisco 1971, Pub. 7902244.
18. Ryge G, Snyder M. Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1973;87:369-377.
19. Ryge G, Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Mjör I. Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials. Swed Dent J 1981;5:235-239.
20. Roulet JF. Marginal integrity: Clinical significance. J Dent 1994;22:S9-12.
21. Braun A-R, Frankenberger R, Krämer N. Clinical performance and margin analysis of Ariston pHc versus Solitaire as posterior restorations after one year. Clin Oral Investig 2001;5:139-147.
22. Perdigão J, Frankenberger R. Effect of solvent and re-wetting time on dentin adhesion. Quintessence Int 2001;32:385-390.
23. Kanca J. Resin bonding to wet substrate. I. Bonding to dentin. Quintessence Int 1992;23:39-41.
24. Huth KC, Manhart J, Selbertinger A, Paschos E, Kaaden C, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R. 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth. Am J Dent 2004;17:51-55.
25. Krämer N, Pelka M, Kautetzky P, Sindel J, Petschelt A. Wear resistance of compomers and packable glass ionomer cements. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1997;52:186-189. (In German).
26. ADA American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. Acceptance Program Guidelines Restorative Materials, March 1996.