Nanohybrid and microfilled hybrid versus conventional hybrid composite restorations: 5-year clinical wear performance

Clinical Oral Investigations

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 181-190

  Palaniappan, Senthamaraiselvi ^a   Elsen, Liesbeth ^a   Lijnen, Inge ^a   Peumans, Marleen ^a   Van Meerbeek, Bart ^a   Lambrechts, Paul ^a  

^a CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Clinical trial; Composite restorations; Microfilled hybrid; Nanocomposites; Wear

Indexed keywords

GRADIA; NANOCOMPOSITE; RESIN; TETRIC CERAM; TETRIC EVOCERAM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; ENAMEL; ENDODONTICS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; MATERIALS TESTING; METHODOLOGY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; STATISTICS; SURFACE PROPERTY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ADULT; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL MARGINAL ADAPTATION; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MATERIALS TESTING; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; NANOCOMPOSITES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPLICA TECHNIQUES; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; SURFACE PROPERTIES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84855949470     PISSN: 14326981     EISSN: 14363771     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00784-010-0500-0     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Hickel R, Manhart J (2001) Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 3: 45-64.
2. Lambrechts P, Debels E, van Landuyt K, Peumans M, van Meerbeek B (2006) How to simulate wear? Overview of existing methods. Dent Mater 22: 693-701.
3. Lambrechts P, Vuylsteke M, Vanherle G, Davidson CL (1984) Quantitative evaluation of the wear resistance of posterior dental restorations: a new three-dimensional measuring technique. J Dent 12: 252-267.
4. Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vuylsteke-Wauters M, Vanherle G (1989) Quantitative in vivo wear of human enamel. J Dent Res 68: 1752-1754.
5. Palaniappan S, Elsen L, Lijnen I, Peumans M, van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P (2009) Three-year randomised clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance, quantitative and qualitative wear patterns of hybrid composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig 14: 441-458.
6. American Dental Association (2001) ADA acceptance program guidelines: resin based composites for posterior restorations. ADA Council on Scientific Affairs, Chicago.
7. Ryge G, Snyder MA (1972) Evaluating the clinical quality of restorations. JADA 87: 369-377.
8. Mehl A, Gloger W, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (1997) A new optical 3-D device for the detection of wear. J Dent Res 76: 1799-1807.
9. Chung KH (1990) The relationship between composition and properties of posterior resin composites. J Dent Res 69: 852-856.
10. Jaarda MJ, Wang R, Lang BR (1996) A regression analysis of filler particle content to predict composite wear. J Prosthet Dent 77: 57-67.
11. Condon JR, Ferracane JL (1997) In vitro wear of composite with varied cure, filler level, and filler treatment. J Dent Res 76: 1405-1411.
12. Söderholm KJ, Lambrechts P, Sarrett D, Abe Y, Yang MC, Labella R et al (2001) Clinical wear performance of eight experimental dental composites over three years determined by two measuring methods. Eur J Oral Sci 109: 273-281.
13. Lobbezoo F, Naeije M (2001) A reliability study of clinical tooth wear measurements. J Prosthet Dent 86: 597-602.
14. Wilson NH, Norman RD (1991) Five-year findings of a multiclinical trial for a posterior composite. J Dent 19: 153-159.
15. Palaniappan S, Bharadwaj D, Mattar D, Peumans M, van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P (2009) Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite. Dent Mater 25: 1302-1314.
16. Okeson J (2003) Management of temporomandibular disorders and occlusion, 5th ed. CV Mosby and Co, St. Louis, MO pp. 416-418, 605.
17. Kleinberg I (1991) Occlusion practice and assessment. Knight Publishing, Oxford, p 28.
18. Smukler H (1991) Equilibration in the natural and restored dentition. Quintessence Publishing, Chicago, p 110.
19. Bayne SC, Taylor DF, Heymann HO (1992) Protection hypothesis for composite wear. Dent Mater 8: 305-309.
20. Willems GLP, Braem M, Vanherle G (1993) Three-year follow-up of five posterior composites: in vivo wear. J Dent 21: 74-78.
21. Wendell JJ, Vann WF (1988) Wear of composite resin restorations in primary versus permanent molar teeth. J Dent Res 67: 71-74.
22. Wilder AD, May KN, Bayne SC, Taylor DF, Leinfelder KF (1999) Seventeen-year clinical study of ultraviolet-cured posterior composite Class I and II restorations. J Esthet Dent 11: 135-142.
23. Blalock JS, Chan DC, Browning WD, Callan R, Hackman S (2006) Measurement of clinical wear of two packable composites after 6 months in service. J Oral Rehabil 33: 59-63.
24. Ferracane JL (2006) Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices? Dent Mater 22: 689-692.
25. Johansson A (1992) A cross-cultural study of occlusal tooth wear. Swed Dent J 86: 1-59.
26. Bakke M, Holm B, Jensen BL, Michler L, Moller E (1990) Unilateral, isometric bite force in 8-68-year-old women and men related to occlusal factors. Scand J Dent Res 98: 149-158.
27. Kim SK, Kim KN, Chang IT, Heo SJ (2001) A study of the effects of chewing patterns on occlusal wear. J Oral Rehabil 28: 1048-1055.
28. Dahl BL, Carlsson GE, Ekfeldt A (1993) Occlusal wear of teeth and restorative materials. A review of classification, etiology, mechanisms of wear, and some aspects of restorative procedures. Acta Odontol Scand 51: 299-311.
29. DeLong R (2006) Intra-oral restorative materials wear: rethinking the current approaches: how to measure wear. Dent Mater 22: 702-711.
30. Winkler MM, Greener EH, Lautenschlager EP (1991) Non-linear in vitro wear of posterior composites with time. Dent Mater 7: 258-262.
31. Krejci I, Lutz F, Zedler C (1992) Effect of contact area size on enamel and composite wear. J Dent Res 71: 1413-1416.
32. Pintado MR, Anderson GC, DeLong R, Douglas WH (1997) Variation in tooth wear in young adults over a two-year period. J Prosthet Dent 77: 313-320.
33. Schmid-Schwap M, Rousson V, Vornwagner K, Heintze SD (2009) Wear of two artificial tooth materials in vivo: a 12-month pilot study. J Prosthet Dent 102: 104-114.
34. Isenberg BP, Leinfelder KF (1990) Efficacy of beveling posterior composite resin preparations. J Esthet Dent 2: 70-73.
35. Baratieri LN, Canabarro S, Lopes GC, Ritter AV (2003) Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of Class V composite restorations: three-year results. Oper Dent 28: 482-487.
36. Patrick M (2006) Brief communication: intertooth and intrafacet dental microwear variation in an archaeological sample of modern humans from the Jordan Valley. Am J Phys Anthropol 129: 39-44.
37. Ryan AS (1979) Wear striation direction on primate teeth: a scanning electron microscope examination. Am J Phys Anthropol 50: 155-168.
38. Kaidonis JA (2008) Tooth wear: the view of the anthropologist. Clin Oral Investig 12: S21-S26.