title: Class I and II posterior composite resin restorations after 5 and 10 years.
abstract: The aim of the present study was to compare and evaluate Class I- and Class II-restorations performed in two different composite posterior materials after 5 and 10 years. Both materials were introduced in 1983 and adapted to stress-bearing restorations. The only difference between the two materials was that one contained barium-aluminium silicate, which made the material radiopaque. All 137 restorations were performed according to standardized clinical procedures by two experienced clinicians and placed in premolars (59) or molars (78). Forty-five of the restorations were Class I and 92 Class II. The restorations were followed for the first 5 years according to the U. S. Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria. After 10 years an evaluation based on the documentation sent in by the patient's present dentist was made. Of the original 137 restorations, 127 could be examined after 5 years and 117 after 10 years. The evaluation showed that after 5 years, 114 of the examined restorations were in clinical function and after 10 years 92, which means 90 and 79 per cent respectively, of the restorations evaluated.
authors.affiliation: Postgraduate Dental Education Center, Orebro, Sweden.
authors.forename: S A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Lundin
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Koch
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000538:Aluminum Silicates; D001464:Barium; D001641:Bicuspid; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry; D003287:Contrast Media; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D019232:Dental Restoration Failure; D019554:Dental Restoration Wear; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D008963:Molar; D019233:Retreatment; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D000538:Aluminum Silicates; D003188:Composite Resins; D003287:Contrast Media; D001464:Barium