Posterior composites revisited: Masters of esthetic dentistry

Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 57-67

  Ritter, André V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RESIN;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; DENTAL EQUIPMENT; DENTAL SURGERY; DENTIN SENSITIVITY; ENDODONTICS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; PREMOLAR TOOTH; RADIATION EXPOSURE;

BICUSPID; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CAVITY LINING; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTIN SENSITIVITY; HUMANS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MATRIX BANDS; MOLAR;

EID: 38549155453     PISSN: 14964155     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2008.00150.x     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Durnan JR. Esthetic dental amalgam-composite resin restorations for posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1971 25 (3 175 6.
2. Ambrose ER, Leith DR, Pinchuk M, Hwang PJ. Manipulation and insertion of a composite resin for anterior and posterior cavity preparations. J Can Dent Assoc 1971 37 (5 188 95.
3. Phillips RW, Avery DR, Mehra R, et al. Observations on a composite resin for Class II restorations: three-year report. J Prosthet Dent 1973 30 (6 891 7.
4. Leinfelder KF, Sluder TB, Sockwell CL, et al. Clinical evaluation of composite resins as anterior and posterior restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 1975 33 (4 407 16.
5. Gordan VV, Mjör IA, Veiga Filho LC, Ritter AV. Teaching of posterior resin-based composite restorations in Brazilian dental schools. Quintessence Int 2000 31 (10 735 40.
6. Lynch CD, McConnell RJ, Wilson NH. Trends in the placement of posterior composites in dental schools. J Dent Educ 2007 71 (3 430 4.
7. American Dental Association, Council on Scientific Affairs, Council on Dental Benefit Programs. Statement on posterior resin-based composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998 129 : 1627 8.
8. Fan PL, Meyer DM. FDI report on adverse reactions to resin-based materials. Int Dent J 2007 57 (1 9 12.
9. Purk JH, Dusevich V, Glaros A, et al. In vivo versus in vitro microtensile bond strength of axial versus gingival cavity preparation walls in Class II resin-based composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2004 135 (2 185 93.
10. Fabianelli A, Goracci C, Ferrari M. Sealing ability of packable resin composites in Class II restorations. J Adhes Dent 2003 5 (3 217 23.
11. Brunton PA, Kassir A, Dashti M, Setcos JC. Effect of different application and polymerization techniques on the microleakage of proximal resin composite restorations in vitro. Oper Dent 2004 29 (1 54 9.
12. Araujo FdeO, Vieira LC, Monteiro Junior S. Influence of resin composite shade and location of the gingival margin on the microleakage of posterior restorations. Oper Dent 2006 31 (5 556 61.
13. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006 18 (5 256 65.
14. Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, et al. A randomized clinical trial of cusp-replacing resin composite restorations: efficiency and short-term effectiveness. Int J Prosthodont 2006 19 (4 349 54.
15. Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BA. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations. Dent Mater 2007 23 (1 2 8.
16. Türkün LS, Aktener BO, Ates¸ M. Clinical evaluation of different posterior resin composite materials: a 7-year report. Quintessence Int 2003 34 (6 418 26.
17. van Dijken JW. Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent 2000 28 (5 299 306.
18. Manhart J, Neuerer P, Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, Hickel R. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 2000 84 (3 289 96.
19. Köhler B, Rasmusson CG, Odman P. A five-year clinical evaluation of Class II composite resin restorations. J Dent 2000 28 (2 111 6.
20. Baratieri LN, Ritter AV. Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique. J Esthet Restor Dent 2001 13 (1 50 7.
21. Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 2001 3 (1 45 64.
22. Wilder AD Jr. May KN Jr. Bayne SC, et al. Seventeen-year clinical study of ultraviolet-cured posterior composite Class I and II restorations. J Esthet Dent 1999 11 (3 135 42.
23. da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, et al. A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 10-year findings. J Dent 2006 34 (7 427 35.
24. Brunthaler A, König F, Lucas T, et al. Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 2003 7 (2 63 70.
25. Hayashi M, Wilson NH. Marginal deterioration as a predictor of failure of a posterior composite. Eur J Oral Sci 2003 111 (2 155 62.
26. Hayashi M, Wilson NH. Failure risk of posterior composites with post-operative sensitivity. Oper Dent 2003 28 (6 681 8.
27. Abell AK, Leinfelder KF, Turner DT. Microscopic observations of the wear of a tooth restorative composite in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res 1983 17 (3 501 7.
28. Mitchem JC, Gronas DG. In vivo evaluation of the wear of restorative resin. J Am Dent Assoc 1982 104 (3 333 5.
29. Mair LH. Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and two amalgams. Quintessence Int 1998 29 (8 483 90.
30. Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Three-year follow-up of five posterior composites: in vivo wear. J Dent 1993 21 (2 74 8.
31. Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vuylsteke-Wauters M, Vanherle G. Quantitative in vivo wear of human enamel. J Dent Res 1989 68 (12 1752 4.
32. Ferracane JL. Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices? Dent Mater 2006 22 (8 689 92.
33. Loomans BA, Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, et al. A randomized clinical trial on proximal contacts of posterior composites. J Dent 2006 34 (4 292 7.
34. Loomans BA, Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, et al. Comparison of proximal contacts of Class II resin composite restorations in vitro. Oper Dent 2006 31 (6 688 93.
35. Klein F, Keller AK, Staehle HJ, Dorfer CE. Proximal contact formation with different restorative materials and techniques. Am J Dent 2002 15 : 232 5.
36. Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Asscherickx K, et al. Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts? Dent Mater 2001 17 (6 533 41.
37. Sarrett DC, Brooks CN, Rose JT. Clinical performance evaluation of a packable posterior composite in bulk-cured restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2006 137 (1 71 80.
38. Rees JS, Jagger DC, Williams DR, et al. A reappraisal of the incremental packing technique for light cured composite resins. J Oral Rehabil 2004 31 (1 81 4.
39. de Wet FA, Exner HV, du Preez IC, van Niekerk JP. The effect of placement technique on marginal adaptation of posterior resins. J Dent Assoc S Afr 1991 46 (3 171 4.
40. Lopes GC, Baratieri LN, Monteiro S Jr., Vieira LC. Effect of posterior resin composite placement technique on the resin-dentin interface formed in vivo. Quintessence Int 2004 35 (2 156 61.
41. Visvanathan A, Ilie N, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. The influence of curing times and light curing methods on the polymerization shrinkage stress of a shrinkage-optimized composite with hybrid-type prepolymer fillers. Dent Mater 2007 23 (7 777 84.
42. Uctasli S, Shortall AC, Burke FJ. Effect of accelerated restorative techniques on the microleakage of Class II composites. Am J Dent 2002 15 (3 153 8.
43. Versluis A, Douglas WH, Cross M, Sakaguchi RL. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996 75 (3 871 8.
44. Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, Barink M, Verdonschot N. Does layering minimize shrinkage stresses in composite restorations? J Dent Res 2003 82 (12 967 71.
45. Ritter AV. Direct resin-based composites: current recommendations for optimal clinical results. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005 26 (7 481 2.
46. Ilie N, Jelen E, Clementino-Luedemann T, Hickel R. Low-shrinkage composite for dental application. Dent Mater J 2007 26 (2 149 55.
47. Walls AW, McCabe JF, Murray JJ. The polymerization contraction of visible-light activated composite resins. J Dent 1988 16 (4 177 81.
48. Watts DC, Satterthwaite JD. Axial shrinkage-stress depends upon both C-factor and composite mass. Dent Mater 2007 in press.
49. Cadenaro M, Biasotto M, Scuor N, et al. Assessment of polymerization contraction stress of three composite resins. Dent Mater 2007 in press.
50. Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent 1997 25 (6 435 40.
51. Giachetti L, Scaminaci Russo D, Bambi C, Grandini R. A review of polymerization shrinkage stress: current techniques for posterior direct resin restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006 7 (4 79 88.
52. Braga RR, Ferracane JL. Alternatives in polymerization contraction stress management. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 2004 15 (3 176 84.
53. Attar N, Tam LE, McComb D. Flow, strength, stiffness and radiopacity of flowable resin composites. J Can Dent Assoc 2003 69 (8 516 21.
54. Baroudi K, Saleh AM, Silikas N, Watts DC. Shrinkage behavior of flowable resin-composites related to conversion and filler-fraction. J Dent 2007 35 (8 651 5.
55. Attar N, Turgut MD, Gungor HC. The effect of flowable resin composites as gingival increments on the microleakage of posterior resin composites. Oper Dent 2004 29 (2 162 7.
56. Ruiz JL, Mitra S. Using cavity liners with direct posterior composite restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2006 27 (6 347 51.
57. Unterbrink GL, Liebenberg WH. Flowable resin composites as "filled adhesives": literature review and clinical recommendations. Quintessence Int 1999 30 (4 249 57.
58. Cho E, Chikawa H, Kishikawa R, et al. Influence of elasticity on gap formation in a lining technique with flowable composite. Dent Mater J 2006 25 (3 538 44.
59. Braga RR, Hilton TJ, Ferracane JL. Contraction stress of flowable composite materials and their efficacy as stress-relieving liners. JADA 2003 134 : 721 8.
60. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, et al. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent 2001 26 : 302 7.
61. Chuang S, Liu J, Chao C, et al. Effects of flowable composite lining and operator experience on microleakage and internal voids in Class II composite restorations. J Prosthet Dent 2001 85 : 177 83.
62. Lindberg A, van Dijken JW, Hörstedt P. In vivo interfacial adaptation of class II resin composite restorations with and without a flowable resin composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 2005 9 (2 77 83.
63. Jain P, Belcher M. Microleakage of Class II resin-based composite restorations with flowable composite in the proximal box. Am J Dent 2000 13 : 235 8.
64. Wibowo G, Stockton L. Microleakage of Class II composite restorations. Am J Dent 2001 14 : 177 85.
65. Ikemi T, Nemoto K. Effects of lining materials on the composite resins shrinkage stresses. Dent Mater J 1994 13 (1 1 8.
66. Tolidis K, Nobecourt A, Randall RC. Effect of a resin-modified glass ionomer liner on volumetric polymerization shrinkage of various composites. Dent Mater 1998 14 (6 417 23.
67. Andersson-Wenckert IE, van Dijken JW, Hörstedt P. Modified Class II open sandwich restorations: evaluation of interfacial adaptation and influence of different restorative techniques. Eur J Oral Sci 2002 110 (3 270 5.
68. Besnault C, Attal JP. Simulated oral environment and microleakage of Class II resin-based composite and sandwich restorations. Am J Dent 2003 16 (3 186 90.
69. Loguercio AD, Alessandra R, Mazzocco KC, et al. Microleakage in class II composite resin restorations: total bonding and open sandwich technique. J Adhes Dent 2002 4 (2 137 44.
70. Nagamine M, Itota T, Torii Y, et al. Effect of resin-modified glass ionomer cements on secondary caries. Am J Dent 1997 10 (4 173 8.
71. Souto M, Donly KJ. Caries inhibition of glass ionomers. Am J Dent 1994 7 (2 122 4.
72. Andersson-Wenckert IE, van Dijken JW, Kieri C. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years. Am J Dent 2004 17 (1 43 50.
73. Dresch W, Volpato S, Gomes JC, et al. Clinical evaluation of a nanofilled composite in posterior teeth: 12-month results. Oper Dent 2006 31 (4 409 17.
74. Poon EC, Smales RJ, Yip KH. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: results at 3.5 years. J Am Dent Assoc 2005 136 (11 1533 40.
75. de Souza FB, Guimarães RP, Silva CH. A clinical evaluation of packable and microhybrid resin composite restorations: one-year report. Quintessence Int 2005 36 (1 41 8.
76. Yip KH, Poon BK, Chu FC, et al. Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid resin-based composites for posterior restorations in permanent teeth: results at 12 months. J Am Dent Assoc 2003 134 (12 1581 9.
77. Perdigão J, Anauate-Netto C, Carmo AR, et al. The effect of adhesive and flowable composite on postoperative sensitivity: 2-week results. Quintessence Int 2004 35 : 777 84.
78. Casselli DS, Martins LR. Postoperative sensitivity in Class I composite resin restorations in vivo. J Adhes Dent 2006 8 (1 53 8.
79. Akpata ES, Behbehani J. Effect of bonding systems on post-operative sensitivity from posterior composites. Am J Dent 2006 19 (3 151 4.
80. Unemori M, Matsuya Y, Hyakutake H, et al. Long-term follow-up of composite resin restorations with self-etching adhesives. J Dent 2007 35 (6 535 40.
81. Akpata ES, Sadiq W. Post-operative sensitivity in glass-ionomer versus adhesive resin-lined posterior composites. Am J Dent 2001 14 (1 34 8.
82. Ritter AV, Swift EJ Jr. Current restorative concepts of pulp protection. Endod Topics 2003 5 (1 41 8.
83. Whitworth JM, Myers PM, Smith J, Walls AW, et al. Endodontic complications after plastic restorations in general practice. Int Endod J 2005 38 (6 409 16.