36-Month clinical evaluation of two adhesives and microhybrid resin composites in Class I restorations

American Journal of Dentistry

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 148-152

  Swift Jr , Edward J ^a   Ritter, André V ^a   Heymann, Harald O ^a   Sturdevant, John R ^a   Wilder Jr , Aldridge D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTIN BONDING AGENT; ESTHET X; ESTHET-X; OPTIBOND SOLO PLUS; POINT 4 COMPOSITE RESIN; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT; XENO III;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; DENTIN SENSITIVITY; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SURFACE PROPERTY;

ADULT; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COLOR; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL MARGINAL ADAPTATION; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTIN SENSITIVITY; DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RESIN CEMENTS; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

EID: 53849111609     PISSN: 08948275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Opdam NJ, Feilzer AJ, Roeters JJ, Smale I. Class I occlusal composite resin restorations: In vivo post-operative sensitivity, wall adaptation, and microleakage. Am J Dent 1998;11:229-234.
2. Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, Feilzer AJ, Verdonschot EH. Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in Class 2 resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent 1998;26:555-562.
3. Pashley DH, Tay FR. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. Part II: Etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater 2001;17:430-444.
4. Senawongse P, Sattabanasuk V, Shimada Y, Otsuki M, Tagami J. Bond strengths of current adhesive systems on intact and ground enamel. J Esthet Rester Dent 2004;16:107-115.
5. Carvalho RM, Pereira JC, Yoshiyama M, Pashley DH. A review of polymerization contraction: The influence of stress development versus stress relief. Oper Dent 1996;21:17-24.
6. Heyrnann HO, Sturdevant JR, Brunson WD, Wilder AD, Sluder TB, Bayne SC. Twelve-month clinical study of dentinal adhesives in Class V cervical lesions. J Am Dent Assoc 1988;116:179-183.
7. Council on Scientific Affairs. Revised American Dental Association acceptance guidelines for dentin and enamel adhesive materials. American Dental Association 2001:1-9.
8. Council on Scientific Affairs. American Dental Association acceptance guidelines for resin based composites for posterior restorations. American Dental Association 2001:1-12.
9. Leinfelder KF. Evaluation of clinical wear of posterior composites. Posterior composite dental restorative materials. The Netherlands: Peter Szulc, 1985; 501-509.
10. Perdigão J, Geraldeli S, Hodges JS. Total-etch versus self-etch adhesive: Effect on postoperative sensitivity. J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134:1621-1629.
11. Perdigão J, Anauate-Netto C, Carmo AR, Hodges JS, Cordeiro HJ, Lewgoy HR, Dutra-Corrêa M, Castilhos N, Amore R. The effect of adhesive and flowable composite on postoperative sensitivity: 2-week results. Quintessence Int 2004;35:777-784.
12. Casselli DS, Martins LR. Postoperative sensitivity in Class I composite resin restorations in vivo. J Adhes Dent 2006 8:53-58.
13. Browning WD, Blalock JS, Callan RS, Brackett WW, Schull GF, Davenport MB, Brackett MG. Postoperative sensitivity: A comparison of two bonding agents. Oper Dent 2007;32:112-117.
14. Akpata ES, Behbehani J. Effect of bonding systems on post-operative sensitivity from posterior composites. Am J Dent 2006;19:151-154.
15. Frankenberger R, Krämer N, Lohbauer U, Nikolaenko SA, Reich SM. Marginal integrity: Is the clinical performance of bonded restorations predictable in vitro? J Adhes Dent 2007;9:107-116.
16. Wilson NH, Gordan W, Brunton PA, Wilson MA, Crisp RJ, Mjör IA. Two-centre evaluation of a resin composite/self-etching restorative system: Three-year findings. J Adhes Dent 2006;8:47-51.
17. 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;136:1533-1540.
18. Wilder AD, Bayne SC, Perdigão J, Heymann HO, Swift EJ. 5-year performance of packable posterior composite. J Dent Res 2004;83 (Sp Is A) (Abstr 0550).
19. 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: 689-692.