Multiple cuspal-coverage direct composite restorations: Functional and esthetic guidelines

Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry

Volumn 20, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 300-308

  Deliperi, Simone ^a,b   Bardwell, David N ^a,b  

^a School of Dental Medicine ^*

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

RESIN; VIT L ESCENCE TRANS ICE; VIT-L-ESCENCE TRANS ICE;

ARTICLE; CASE REPORT; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL EQUIPMENT; DENTAL SURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MANDIBLE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MOLAR TOOTH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; RETREATMENT;

CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; ESTHETICS, DENTAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MANDIBLE; MATRIX BANDS; MIDDLE AGED; MOLAR; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RETREATMENT;

EID: 54749127465     PISSN: 14964155     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2008.00198.x     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R. Buocore 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.
2. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006 18 : 256 65.
3. 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 : 349 54.
4. Plasmans PJJM, Creugers NHJ, Mulder J. Long-term survival of extensive amalgam restorations. J Dent Res 1998 77 : 453 60.
5. Smales RJ, Hawthorne WS. Long-term survival and cost-effectiveness of five dental restorative materials used in various classes of cavity preparations. Int Dent J 1996 46 : 126 30.
6. McDaniel JR, Davis RD, Murchison DF, Cohen RB. Causes of failure among cuspal-coverage amalgam restorations: a clinical survey. J Amer Dent Assoc 2000 131 : 173 7.
7. Bayne SC. Commentary. Does the wear of packable composite equal that of dental amalgam? J Esthet Restor Dent 2004 16 : 365 7.
8. Letzel H, van't Hof MA, Marshall GW, Marshall SJ. The influence of the amalgam alloy on the survival of amalgam restorations: a secondary analysis of multiple controlled clinical trials. J Dent Res 1997 76 : 1787 98.
9. Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, D'Hoore W, Carvalho J, Qvist V. Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent 2003 31 : 395 405.
10. 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 92.
11. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Taylor DF. Dental materials. In : Roberson TM, editor. Sturdevant's art and science of operative dentistry, 4th ed. St. Louis (MO) : Mosby 2001. pp. 204 5.
12. Bayne SC, Taylor DF, Heymann HO. Protection hypothesis for composite wear. Dent Mater 1992 8 : 305 9.
13. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. An alternative method to reduce polymerization shrinkage in direct posterior composite restorations. J Amer Dent Assoc 2002 133 : 1387 98.
14. Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. Direct cuspal-coverage posterior composite resin restorations: a case report. Oper Dent 2006 31 : 143 50.
15. Dietschi D, Spreafico R. Tooth preparation. In : Dietschi D, Spreafico R, editors. Adhesive metal-free restorations. Berlin : Quintessence Publishing Co 1997. pp. 79 99.
16. Magne P, So WS, Cascione D. Immediate dentin sealing supports delayed restoration placement. J Prosthet Dent 2007 98 : 166 74.
17. Magne P. Immediate dentin sealing: a fundamental procedure for indirect bonded restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005 17 : 144 54.
18. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, et al. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater 2008 24 : 90 101.
19. Misch CE, Bidez MW. Occlusal considerations for implant-supported prostheses: implant-protective occlusion. In : Misch CE, editor. Dental implant prosthetics. St. Louis (MO) : Elsevier Mosby 2005. pp. 472 510.
20. Magne P, Harrington D, Harrington S. Semi-direct techniques. Chapter III. In : Esthetic and biomimetic restorative dentistry. Manual for posterior esthetic restorations. St. Louis (MO) : Elsevier Mosby 2005. pp. 44 59.
21. Fennis WMM, Kuijs RH, Kreulen CM, et al. Fatigue resistance of teeth restored with cuspal coverage composite restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2004 17 : 313 7.
22. Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, et al. A comparison of fatigue resistance of three materials for cusp-replacing adhesive restorations. J Dent 2006 34 : 19 25.
23. Freiberg RS, Ferracane JL. Evaluation of cure, properties and wear resistance of Artglass dental composite. Am J Dent 1998 11 : 214 8.
24. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. The effect of postcuring on quantity of remaining double bonds, mechanical properties, and in vitro wear of two resin composites. J Dent 2000 28 : 447 52.
25. Swift EJ Jr. Processed composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2001 13 : 284.
26. Pallesen U, van Dijken JWV. An 8-year evaluation of sintered ceramic and glass ceramic inlays processed by the Cerec CAD/CAM system. Eur J Oral Sci 2000 108 : 239 46.
27. Krämer N, Lohbauer U, Frankenberger R. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations. Am J Dent 2000 13 (Spec. No 60D 76D.
28. Kramer N, Frankenberger R. Leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic after six years: wear of luting composites. Oper Dent 2000 25 : 466 72.
29. Hayashi M, Tsubakimoto Y, Takeshige F, Ebisu S. Analysis of longitudinal marginal deterioration of ceramic inlays. Oper Dent 2004 29 : 386 91.
30. Ekfeldt A, Fransson B, Söderlund B, Oilo G. Wear resistance of some prosthodontic materials in vivo. Acta Odontol Scand 1993 51 : 99 107.
31. Dahl BL, Oilo G. In vivo wear ranking of some restorative materials. Quintessence Int 1994 25 : 561 5.
32. Yip KH, Smales RJ, Kaidonis JA. Differential wear of teeth and restorative materials: clinical implications. Int J Prosthodont 2004 17 : 350 6.
33. Ekfeldt A, Oilo G. Wear of prosthodontic materials - an in vivo study. J Oral Rehabil 1990 17 : 117 29.