Longevity of Posterior Composite Restorations

Author:

Opdam N.J.M.1,van de Sande F.H.2,Bronkhorst E.1,Cenci M.S.2,Bottenberg P.3,Pallesen U.4,Gaengler P.5,Lindberg A.6,Huysmans M.C.D.N.J.M.1,van Dijken J.W.6

Affiliation:

1. Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, College of Dental Sciences, Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Ph van Leydenlaan 25, PO Box 9101 6500HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands

2. Federal University of Pelotas, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, 5th floor, Pelotas, RS, 96015560, Brazil

3. Vrije Universiteit Brussels, Dept. of Oral Health Sciences, Laarbeeklaan 103, BE 1090 Brussels, Belgium

4. Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Institute of Odontology, Nørre Allé 20, DK-2200, Copenhagen, Denmark

5. Universität Witten/Herdecke, Abteilung für Zahnerhaltung und Präventive Zahnmedizin, Alfred-Herrhausen-Str. 44, D-58455 Witten, Germany

6. Umeå University, Department of Odontology, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis, based on individual participant data from several studies, was to investigate the influence of patient-, materials-, and tooth-related variables on the survival of posterior resin composite restorations. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a search resulting in 12 longitudinal studies of direct posterior resin composite restorations with at least 5 years’ follow-up. Original datasets were still available, including placement/failure/censoring of restorations, restored surfaces, materials used, reasons for clinical failure, and caries-risk status. A database including all restorations was constructed, and a multivariate Cox regression method was used to analyze variables of interest [patient (age; gender; caries-risk status), jaw (upper; lower), number of restored surfaces, resin composite and adhesive materials, and use of glass-ionomer cement as base/liner (present or absent)]. The hazard ratios with respective 95% confidence intervals were determined, and annual failure rates were calculated for subgroups. Of all restorations, 2,816 (2,585 Class II and 231 Class I) were included in the analysis, of which 569 failed during the observation period. Main reasons for failure were caries and fracture. The regression analyses showed a significantly higher risk of failure for restorations in high-caries-risk individuals and those with a higher number of restored surfaces.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

General Dentistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3