Minimum requirements for new dental materials

Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

Volumn 34, Issue 12, 2007, Pages 907-912

  Mjor I A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY   (United States)

Author keywords

CE mark; Certification; Controlled clinical trials; Dental standards; International organization for standardization; Practice based research; Seal of approval; Specifications

Indexed keywords

BIOMATERIAL; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; RESIN;

ARTICLE; HUMAN; MATERIALS TESTING; QUALITY CONTROL; STANDARD;

BIOCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL IMPRESSION MATERIALS; DENTAL MATERIALS; HUMANS; MATERIALS TESTING; QUALITY CONTROL; REFERENCE STANDARDS;

EID: 36349005802     PISSN: 0305182X     EISSN: 13652842     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2007.01726.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bayne SC. Dental restorations for oral rehabilitation-testing of laboratory properties versus clinical performance for clinical decision making. J Oral Rehabil. 2007 34 : 921 932.
2. ISO 4049. Dentistry-Polymer-based Filling Materials, Restorative and Luting Materials. Third edn. Geneva : ISO, 2000.
3. Ferracane JL. Dental composites - which tests are useful for developing new products and predicting performance? Transact Acad Dent Mater. 2005 19 : 41 52.
4. Sarrett DC. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005 21 : 9 20.
5. Svanberg M, Mjör IA, Ørstavik D. Mutans streptococci in plaque from margins of amalgam, composite, and glass-ionomer restorations. J Dent Res. 1990 69 : 861 864.
6. Sönju T, Glantz PO. Chemical composition of salivary integuments formed in vivo on solids with some established surface characteristics. Arch Oral Biol. 1975 20 : 687 691.
7. Ørstavik D, Ørstavik J. In vitro attachment of Streptococcus sanguis to dental crown and bridge cements. J Oral Rehabil. 1976 3 : 139 144.
8. Skjørland KK. Auger analysis of integuments formed on different dental filling materials in vivo. Acta Odontol Scand. 1982 40 : 129 134.
9. Mjör IA. Placement and replacement of restorations. Oper Dent. 1981 6 : 49 54.
10. Mjör IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997 55 : 58 63.
11. Mjör IA, Moorhead JE, Dahl JE. Reasons for replacement of restorations in permanent teeth in general dental practice. Int Dent J. 2000 50 : 361 366.
12. Mjör IA, Toffenetti F. Secondary caries: a literature review with case reports. Quintessence Int. 2000 31 : 165 179.
13. Forsten L. Fluoride release from a glass-ionomer cement. Scand J Dent Res. 1977 85 : 503 504.
14. Forsten L. Fluoride release and uptake by glass-ionomers. Scand J Dent Res. 1991 99 : 241 245.
15. Tveit AB, Gjerdet NR. Fluoride release from a fluoride-containing amalgam, a glass-ionomer cement and a silicate cement in artificial saliva. J Oral Rehabil. 1981 8 : 237 241.
16. Mount GJ. Buonocore memorial lecture. Glass-ionomer cements: past, present and future. Oper Dent. 1994 19 : 82 90.
17. Randall RC, Wilson NH. Glass-ionomer restoratives: a systematic review of a secondary caries treatment effect. J Dent Res. 1999 78 : 628 637.
18. Burke FM, Ray NJ, McConnell RJ. Fluoride-containing restorative materials. Int Dent. 2006 56 : 33 43.
19. McComb D, Erickson RL, Maxymiw WG, Wood RE. A clinical comparison of glass-ionomer, resin-modified glass-ionomer and resin composite restorations in the treatment of cervical caries in xerostomic head and neck radiation patients. Oper Dent. 2002 27 : 430 437.
20. Haveman CW, Summitt JB, Burgess JO, Carlson K. Three restorative materials and topical fluoride gel used in xerostomic patients: a clinical comparison. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003 134 : 177 184.
21. Mjör IA, Jokstad A. Five-year study of Class II restorations in permanent teeth using amalgam, glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cerment and resin-based composite materials. J Dent. 1993 21 : 338 343.
22. Osborne JW, Phillips RW, Gale EN, Binon PP. Three-year clinical comparison of three amalgam alloy types emphasizing an appraisal of the evaluation methods used. J Am Dent Assoc. 1976 93 : 784 789.
23. Osborne JW, Gale EN, Chew CL, Rhodes BF, Phillips RW. Clinical performance and physical properties of 12 amalgam alloys. J Dent Res. 1978 57 : 983 988.
24. Osborne JW, Leinfelder KF, Gale EN, Sluder TB. Two independent evaluations of ten amalgam alloys. J Prosthet Dent. 1980 43 : 622 626.
25. Mahler DB, Marantz RL, Engle JH. A predictive model for the clinical marginal fracture of amalgam. J Dent Res. 1980 59 : 1420 1427.
26. Vrijhoef MM, Letzel H. Creep versus marginal fracture of amalgam restorations. J Oral Rehabil. 1986 13 : 299 303.
27. Smales RJ. Longevity of low- and high-copper amalgams analyzed by preparation class, tooth site, patient age, and operator. Oper Dent. 1991 16 : 162 168.
28. Rytömaa I, Jarvinen V, Jarvinen J. Variation in caries recording and restorative treatment plan among university teachers. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1979 7 : 335 339.
29. Karl-Johan S. Correlation between Marginal Discrepancies at the Amalgam/Tooth Interface and Recurrent Caries. Kenneth J.Anusavice. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Criteria for Placement and Replacement of Dental restorations. Chicago (IL) : Quintessence Books 1987.
30. Espelid I, Tveit AB. Diagnosis of secondary caries and crevices adjacent to amalgam. Int Dent J. 1991 41 : 359 364.
31. Bader JD, Shugars DA. Understanding dentists' restorative treatment decisions. J Public Health Dent. 1992 52 : 102 110.
32. Kidd EA, Joyston-Bechal S, Beighton D. Marginal ditching and staining as a predictor of secondary caries around amalgam restorations: a clinical and microbiological study. J Dent Res. 1995 74 : 1206 1211.
33. ISO7405. Dentistry-Preclinical Evaluation of Biocompatiblity of Medical Devices Used in Dentistry - Test Methods for Denal Materials. Geneva : ISO, 1997.
34. ISO 10993-1. Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices - Part 1: Evaluation and Testing. Geneva : ISO, 2003.
35. Ferreira CF, Magini RS, Sharpe PT. Biological tooth replacement and repair. J Oral Rehabil. 2007 34 : 933 939.
36. Karlsson S. CE-märkning av implantat - ingen garanti för kvalitet. Tandlægebladet. 2006 110 : 884 885.