Performance of 2 packable composites at 12 months

Quintessence International

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 361-368

  Browning, William D ^a,b   Myers, Michael L ^a   Chan, Daniel C N ^a   Downey, Mary C ^a   Pohjola, Randal M ^a   Frazier, Kevin B ^a  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Class 2 posterior restoration; Flowable composite liner; Marginal seal; Marginal staining; Packable resin composite; Surface sealant

Indexed keywords

ALERT COMPOSITE RESIN; RESIN; SUREFIL PACKABLE COMPOSITE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARIES; DENTAL SURGERY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; ENDODONTICS; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MOLAR TOOTH; PATHOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECURRENT DISEASE; SURFACE PROPERTY;

ADULT; COLOR; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARIES; DENTAL CAVITY LINING; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MOLAR; RECURRENCE; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

EID: 33645913843     PISSN: 00336572     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Asscherickx K, Simon S, Lambrechts P, Vannerle G. Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts? Dent Mater 2001;17:533-541.
2. Lundin S, Koch G. Class I and II posterior composite resin restorations after 5 and 10 years. Swed Dent J 1999;23:165-171.
3. Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: The 10-year report. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:185-194.
4. Collins CJ, Bryant RW, Hodge KL. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings. J Dent 1998;26:311-317.
5. Chadwick B, Treasure E, Dummer P, et al. Challenges with studies investigating longevity of dental restorations-A critique of a systematic review. J Dent 2001;29:155-161.
6. Berthold M. Restoratives, trend data shows shift of use in materials. ADA News 2002;33:1.
7. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Complete marginal seal of Class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res 1990;69:1240-1243.
8. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JJ. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent 2001;26:302-307.
9. Belli S, Inokoshi S, Ozer F, Pereira PNR, Ogata M, Tagami J. 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.
10. Tung FF, Estafan D, Scherer W. Microleakage of a condensable resin composite: An in vitro investigation. Quintessence Int 2000;31:430-434.
11. Cvar JF, Ryge G. Criteria for the Clinical Evaluation of Dental Restorative Materials. US Dept Health Human Services, publication 790-244. Government Printing Office, 1971.
12. Ernst CP, Martin M, Stuff S, Willershausen B. Clinical performance of a packable resin composite for posterior teeth after 3 years. Clin Oral Investig 2001;5:148-155.
13. Schoch M, Kramer N, Frankenburg R, Petschelt A. Direct posterior composite restorations with a new adhesive system: One-year results. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:167-173.
14. Sakrana AA, Tanoue N, Kawasaki K, Matsumura H. One-year clinical evaluation of two composite materials used for anterior class V restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2004;31:985-990.
15. Ernst CP, Buhtz C, Rissing C, Willershausen B. Clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 2 years. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2002;23:716-717.
16. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R. The suitability of packable resin-based composites for posterior restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2001;132:639-645.