Clinical performance of the posterior composite OuiXfil after 3, 6, and 18 months in Class 1 and 2 cavities

Quintessence International

Volumn 39, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 757-765

  Manhart, Juergen ^a,b   Chen, Hong Yan ^a   Neuerer, Petra ^a   Thiele, Lidka ^a   Jaensch, Birgit ^a   Hickel, Reinhard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b School of Dentistry   (Germany)

Author keywords

Clinical study; Composite; Longevity; Molars; USPHS

Indexed keywords

DENTIN BONDING AGENT; QUIXFIL; RESIN; TETRIC CERAM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ADULT; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MOLAR;

EID: 52749083611     PISSN: 00336572     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Keramikinlays und Veneers. Munich: Karger, 1997.
2. Leinfelder KF, Sluder TB, Santos JFF, Wall JT. Five-year clinical evaluation of anterior and posterior restorations of composite resins. Oper Dent 1980;5:57-65.
3. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Thompson VP, Holston AM, Gingell JC. A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int 1991; 22:143-151.
4. Geurtsen W, Schoeler U. A 4-year retrospective clinical study of Class I and Class II composite restorations. J Dent 1997;25:229-232.
5. Jokstad A, Mjör IA, Qvist V. The age of restorations in situ. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52:234-248.
6. Mjor IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand 1997;55:58-63.
7. Pallesen U, Qvist V. Composite resin fillings and inlays. An 11-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7:71-79.
8. Smales RJ, Webster DA, Leppard Pl. Survival predictions of four types of dental restorative materials. J Dent 1991;19:278-282.
9. Leinfelder KF, Bayne SC, Swift EJ. Packable composites: Overview and technical considerations. J Esthet Dent 1999;11:234-249.
10. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R. The suitability of packable resin-based composites for posterior restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2001;132:639-645.
11. Choi KK, Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ, Charlton D Properties of packable dental composites. J Esthet Dent 2000;12:216-226.
12. Cobb DS, MacGregor KM, Vargas MA, Denehy GE. The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites: A comparison. J Am Dent Assoc 2000;131:1610-1615.
13. Nickel R. Moderne Füllungswerkstoffe. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1997;52:572-585.
14. Manhart J, Thum M, Chen HY, Hickel R. Marginal adaptation of Xeno III self-etching adhesive after artifical aging. J Dent Res 2003;82(Spec Iss A): 935.
15. Chen HY, Manhart J, Thum M, Hickel R. Determination of microleakage of Xeno III self-etching adhesive. J Dent Res 2003;82(Spec Iss A): 934.
16. Flessa HP, Albrecht A, Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R. Marginal quality of packable composites/ormocers after loading [abstract 1716]. J Dent Res 2001;80: 250.
17. Manhart J, Albrecht A, Chen HY, Hickel R. Microleakage of packable composites/ormocers after artificial aging [abstract 556]. J Dent Res 2001; 80:105.
18. Leinfelder KF. Evaluation of criteria used for assessing the clinical performance of composite resins in posterior teeth. Quintessence Int 1987;18:531-536.
19. Ryge G. Clinical criteria, Int Dent J 1980;30:347-358.
20. Ryge G, Snyder M. Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1973;87:369-377.
21. 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.
22. Feller RP, Ricks CL, Matthews TG, Santucci EA. Three-year clinical evaluation of composite formulations for posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1987;57: 544-550.
23. Ryge G, Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Mjör IA. Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials. Swed Dent J 1981;5: 235-239.
24. Pelka M, Dettenhofer G, Reinelt C, Krämer N, Petschelt A. Validität und Rehabilität klinischer Kriterien für adhäsive Inlaysysteme. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 1994;49:921-925.
25. Roulet JF. Benefits and disadvantages of tooth-coloured alternatives to amalgam. J Dent 1997;25: 459-473.
26. Ryge G, Cvar JF. Criteria for the Clinical Evaluation of Dental Restorative Materials. US Dental Health Center, San Francisco, publication 7902244. US Government Printing Office, 1971.
27. Sturdevant JR, Lundeen TF, Sluder TB, Leinfelder K. Three-year study of two light-cured posterior composite resins. Dent Mater 1986;2:263-268.
28. Türkün LS, Türkün M, Ozata F. Two-year clinical evaluation of a packable resin-based composite. J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134:1205-1212.
29. Lopes LG, Cefaly DF, Franco EB, Mondelli RF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF. Clinical evaluation of two "packable" posterior composite resins: Two-year results. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7:123-128.
30. Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B. Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7:129-134.
31. Gordan W, Mjör IA. Short- and long-term clinical evaluation of postoperative sensitivity of a new resin-based restorative material and self-etching primer. Oper Dent 2002;27:543-548.
32. Goldberg AJ, Rydinge E, Santucci E, Racz WB. Clinical evaluation methods for posterior composite restorations. J Dent Res 1984;63:1387-1391.
33. Lundin SA, Koch G. Class I and II composite resin restorations: 4-year clinical follow-up. Swed Dent J 1989;13:217-227.
34. Lundin SA, Koch G. Class I and II posterior composite resin restorations after 5 and 10 years. Swed Dent J 1999;23:165-171.
35. Wilson NHF, Wilson MA, Wastell DG, Smith GA. A clinical trial of a visible light-cured posterior composite resin restorative material: Five-year results. Quintessence Int 1988;19:675-681.
36. Toledano M, Osorio R, de Leonardi G, Rosales-Leal JI, Ceballos L, Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA. Influence of selfetching primer on the resin adhesion to enamel and dentin. Am J Dent 2001;14:205-210.
37. Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. Part II: Etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater 2001;17:430-444.
38. Hickel R. Glass ionomers, cermets, hybrid ionomers and compomers - (Long-term) clinical evaluation. Trans Acad Dent Mat 1996;9:105-129.
39. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 2004;29: 481-508.