Premium
Seventeen‐Year Clinical Study of Ultraviolet‐Cured Posterior Composite Class I and II Restorations
Author(s) -
WILDER ALDRIDGE D.,
MAY KENNETH N.,
BAYNE STEPHEN C.,
TAYLOR DUANE F.,
LEINFELDER KARL F.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.919
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1708-8240
pISSN - 1496-4155
DOI - 10.1111/j.1708-8240.1999.tb00390.x
Subject(s) - dentistry , medicine , enamel paint , resin composite , bevel , composite number , materials science , orthodontics , composite material , structural engineering , engineering
Objectives: To compare the clinical performance of four commercial ultraviolet light‐cured composite materials, and to evaluate curing‐system effects on long‐term wear resistance of Class I and II restorations. Materials and Methods: Approximately 32 samples of each of four different ultraviolet light‐cured composites (n = 130) were inserted into conventional Class I and I1 cavity preparations by two clinicians. Cavosurface margins of the preparations were not beveled. Enamel walls of the preparation were etched, and the respective bonding agent was applied. Each restoration was evaluated by two clinicians at 5, 10, and 17 years. Direct evaluations were performed using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Indirect evaluations were performed using the Leinfelder cast evaluation method. Results : After 17 years, 65% of the restorations were recalled and pooled direct evaluations were conducted for color matching (94% alfa), marginal discoloration (100% alfa), marginal integrity (100% alfa), secondary caries (92% alfa), surface texture (72% alfa), and anatomic form (22% alfa). Mean occlusal wear from indirect evaluations at 5, 10, and 17 years was 197 ± 85 pm, 235 ± 72 μm, and 264 ± 80 μm, respectively. For direct and indirect evaluations there were significant differences ( p ±.05) between the baseline and 5‐year recall evaluations.