Three-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial of the posterior composite QuiXfil in class I and II cavities

Clinical Oral Investigations

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 301-307

  Manhart, Juergen ^a   Chen, Hong Yan ^a   Hickel, Reinhard ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Clinical study; Composite; Longevity; Molars; USPHS criteria

Indexed keywords

QUIXFIL; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT; TETRIC CERAM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CEMENTATION; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TOOTH DISCOLORATION;

ADULT; CEMENTATION; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MOLAR; RESIN CEMENTS; TOOTH DISCOLORATION;

EID: 69649092002     PISSN: 14326981     EISSN: 14363771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-008-0233-5     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Barnes DM, Blank LW, Thompson VP, Holston AM, Gingell JC (1991) A 5- and 8-year clinical evaluation of a posterior composite resin. Quintessence Int 22:143-151
2. Barone A, Derchi G, Rossi A, Marconini S, Covani U (2008) Longitudinal clinical evaluation of bonded composite inlays: A 3-year study. Quintessence Int 39:65-71
3. Chen HY, Manhart J, Thum M, Hickel R (2003) Determination of microleakage of Xeno III self-etching adhesive. J Dent Res 82. Special Issue A, CD-ROM of Abstracts, Abstract 934
4. Choi KK, Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ, Charlton D (2000) Properties of packable dental composites. J Esthet Dent 12:216-226
5. Cobb DS, MacGregor KM, Vargas MA, Denehy GE (2000) The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites: A comparison. J Am Dent Assoc 131:1610-1615
6. Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B (2003) Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 7:129-134
7. Feller RP, Ricks CL, Matthews TG, Santucci EA (1987) Three-year clinical evaluation of composite formulations for posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 57:544-550
8. Flessa HP, Albrecht A., Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R (2001) Marginal quality of packable composites/ormocers after loading. J Dent Res 80. Special Issue A, 250, Abstract 1716
9. Geurtsen W, Schoeler U (1997) A 4-year retrospective clinical study of class I and class II composite restorations. J Dent 25:229-232
10. Goldberg AJ, Rydinge E, Santucci E, Racz WB (1984) Clinical evaluation methods for posterior composite restorations. J Dent Res 63:1387-1391
11. Gordan VV, Mjor IA (2002) Short-and long-term clinical evaluation of post-operative sensitivity of a new resin-based restorative material and self-etching primer. Oper Dent 27:543-548
12. Hickel R (1996) Glass ionomers, cermets, hybrid ionomers and compomers - (long-term) clinical evaluation. Trans Acad Dent Mat 9:105-129
13. Hickel R (1997) Moderne Füllungswerkstoffe. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 52:572-585
14. Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH (1997) Keramikinlays und veneers. Hanser, Munich
15. Hickel R, Roulet JF, Bayne S, Heintze SD, Mjör IA, Peters M, Rousson V, Randall R, Schmalz G, Tyas M, Vanherle G (2007) Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig 11:5-33
16. Ishikiriama SK, Mondelli RF, Kano SC, Ishikiriama A, Mondelli J (2007) Role of additional retention on marginal adaptation and sealing of large resin composite class II restorations. Oper Dent 32:564-570
17. Jokstad A, Mjör IA, Qvist V (1994) The age of restorations in situ. Acta Odontol Scand 52:234-248
18. Leinfelder KF (1987) Evaluation of criteria used for assessing the clinical performance of composite resins in posterior teeth. Quintessence Int 18:531-536
19. Leinfelder KF, Bayne SC, Swift EJ (1999) Packable composites: Overview and technical considerations. J Esthet Dent 11:234-249
20. Leinfelder KF, Sluder TB, Santos JFF, Wall JT (1980) Five-year clinical evaluation of anterior and posterior restorations of composite resins. Oper Dent 5:57-65
21. Lopes LG, Cefaly DF, Franco EB, Mondelli RF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF (2003) Clinical evaluation of two "packable" posterior composite resins: Two-year results. Clin Oral Investig 7:123-128
22. Lundin SA, Koch G (1989) Class I and II composite resin restorations: 4-year clinical follow-up. Swed Dent J 13:217-227
23. Lundin SA, Koch G (1999) Class I and II posterior composite resin restorations after 5 and 10 years. Swed Dent J 23:165-171
24. Manhart J, Albrecht A, Chen HY, Hickel R (2001) Microleakage of packable composites/ormocers after artificial aging. J Dent Res 80. Special Issue A, 105, Abstract 556
25. Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R (2004) Buonocore memorial lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 29:481-508
26. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R (2001) The suitability of packable resin-based composites for posterior restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 132:639-645
27. Manhart J, Thum M, Chen HY, Hickel R (2003) Marginal adaptation of Xeno III self-etching adhesive. J Dent Res 82. Special Issue A, CD-ROM of Abstracts, Abstract 935
28. Mjör IA (1997) The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand 55:58-63
29. Pallesen U, Qvist V (2003) Composite resin fillings and inlays. An 11-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig 7:71-79
30. Pashley DH, Tay FR (2001) Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching adhesives. Part II: Etching effects on unground enamel. Dent Mater 17:430-444
31. Pelka M, Dettenhofer G, Reinelt C, Krämer N, Petschelt A (1994) Validität und Reliabilität klinischer Kriterien für adhäsive Inlaysysteme. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 49:921-925
32. Polydorou O, Manolakis A, Hellwig E, Hahn P (2008) Evaluation of the curing depth of two translucent composite materials using a halogen and two LED curing units. Clin Oral Invest 12:45-51
33. Roulet JF (1997) Benefits and disadvantages of tooth-coloured alternatives to amalgam. J Dent 25:459-473
34. Ryge G (1980) Clinical criteria. Int Dent J 30:347-358
35. Ryge G, Cvar JF (1971) Criteria for the clinical evaluation of dental restorative materials. US Government Printing Office, US Dental Health Center, San Francisco. Publication no. 7902244
36. Ryge G, Jendresen MD, Glantz PO, Mjör IA (1981) Standardization of clinical investigators for studies of restorative materials. Swed Dent J 5:235-239
37. Ryge G, Snyder M (1973) Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 87:369-377
38. Ryge G, Stanford JW (1977) Recommended format for protocol of clinical research program: Clinical comparison of several anterior and posterior restorative materials. Int Dent J 27:46-57
39. Smales RJ, Webster DA, Leppard PI (1991) Survival predictions of four types of dental restorative materials. J Dent 19:278-282
40. Sturdevant JR, Lundeen TF, Sluder TB, Leinfelder K (1986) Three-year study of two light-cured posterior composite resins. Dent Mater 2:263-268
41. Toledano M, Osorio R, de Leonardi G, Rosales-Leal JI, Ceballos L, Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA (2001) Influence of self-etching primer on the resin adhesion to enamel and dentin. Am J Dent 14:205-210
42. Türkün LS, Turkun M, Ozata F (2003) Two-year clinical evaluation of a packable resin-based composite. J Am Dent Assoc 134:1205-1212
43. Wilson NHF, Wilson MA, Wastell DG, Smith GA (1988) A clinical trial of a visible light cured posterior composite resin restorative material: five-year results. Quintessence Int 19:675-681