Clinical performance of three anterior restorative materials over 10 years.
The long-term performance of two chemically activated composite resins was compared to that of one silicate cement. Bulk and cavosurface marginal discoloration was evaluated with both an indirect photographic method and the direct US Public Health Service evaluation system. The results confirmed that composite resins had superior performance but higher secondary caries incidence than did silicate cements. The macrofilled composite resins showed better clinical performance than the microfilled restorations, as well as similar incidences of bulk and marginal discoloration. The agreement between the scores obtained with the direct evaluation criteria and those resulting from the indirect evaluation method was relatively poor. The indirect scores were usually the same or poorer than the direct clinical scores. The results indicated that the clinical evaluation may be the least sensitive of the two methods. The discrepancy in the scorings may, on the other hand, signify that the indirect photographic method records reflectance spectra that are not normally obtained in vivo.
Jokstad
A
A
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, University of Oslo, Norway.
Mjör
I A
IA
Nilner
K
K
Kaping
S
S
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D002648:Child; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards*; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D006801:Humans; D007180:Incisor; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008875:Middle Aged; D010316:Particle Size; D017797:Prosthesis Coloring; D012823:Silicate Cement
D012823:Silicate Cement; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; C029002:Silicap; C033930:Silar (3M)