Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-09-2015 | Original Article

Survival characteristics of composite restorations in primary teeth

Authors: Katharina Bücher, Isabel Metz, Vinay Pitchika, Reinhard Hickel, Jan Kühnisch

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 7/2015

Abstract

Objectives

This retrospective study analyzed restoration survival of composite fillings in children with at high caries risk in relation to age, sex, operator, tooth type, filling extension, and material used.

Materials and methods

Among 667 children treated in 2004–2012 in a university setting without sedation or general anesthesia, 2388 composite fillings were included. Relevant data from regular recall intervals were retrieved from patients’ records. Either total-etch or a self-etch adhesive combined with flowable and/or (nano)hybrid composite was used. The Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard analysis with backward elimination model were applied for survival analysis.

Results

For the observation period of 8 years (mean 1.7 years), the cumulative failure rate was 17.2 % with annual failure rates of 10.0 %. In 8.8 % of the cases, fillings failed due to secondary caries. In 8.3 % technical failure due to total filling loss, loosening, marginal gaps, or tooth fracture occurred. Tooth type, filling extension, age, operator, dental dam, and type of adhesive were significant for survival (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Filling survival was comparably lower to composite restorations observed in prospective clinical studies on permanent teeth and other tooth-colored restoratives used in primary teeth. Due to the very high caries risk and young age of the population, frequent loss due to secondary caries was observed. With respect to the high caries risk, composite restorations can be used to treat carious primary teeth, though a strict caries prevention regimen should be followed to minimize restoration failure.

Clinical relevance

Filling loss of composites in the primary dentition is associated with secondary caries on the long term.

Skeie MS, Raadal M, Strand GV, Esplid I (2006) The relationship between caries in the primary dentition at 5 years of age and permanent dentition at 10 years of age—a longitudinal study. Int J Paediatr Dent 16:152–160CrossRefPubMed

Alm A, Wendt LK, Koch G, Birkhed D, Nilsson M (2012) Caries in adolescence-influence from early childhood. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 40:125–133. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0528.2011.00647.x CrossRefPubMed

Finucane D (2012) Rationale for restoration of carious primary teeth: a review. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 13:281–292CrossRefPubMed

Drummond BK, Meldrum AM, Boyd D (2013) Influence of dental care on children’s oral health and wellbeing. Br Dent J 214:E27. doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.2013.533 CrossRefPubMed

Hickel R, Kaaden C, Paschos E, Buerkle V, García-Godoy F, Manhart J (2005) Longevity of occlusally-stressed restorations in posterior primary teeth. Am J Dent 18:198–211PubMed

Kandiah T, Johnson J, Fayle SA (2010) British Society of Paediatric Dentistry: a policy document on management of caries in the primary dentition. Int J Paediatr Dent 20:5. doi:10.1111/j.1365-263X.2010.01087.x CrossRefPubMed

Yengopal V, Harneker SY, Patel N, Siegfried N (2009) Dental fillings for the treatment of caries in the primary dentition. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2):CD004483. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004483.pub2

Käkilehto T, Välimäki S, Tjäderhane L, Vähänikkilä H, Salo S, Anttonen V (2013) Survival of primary molar restorations in four birth cohorts—a retrospective, practice-based study. Acta Odontol Scand 71:1418–1422. doi:10.3109/00016357.2013.766359 CrossRefPubMed

Burke FJT (2004) Amalgam to tooth-coloured materials—implications for clinical practice and dental education: governmental restrictions and amalgam-usage survey results. J Dent 32:343–345CrossRefPubMed

10.

BIO Intelligence Service (2012) Study on the potential for reducing mercury pollution from dental amalgam and batteries, final report prepared for the European Commission –DG ENV. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/mercury/pdf/Final_report_11.07.12.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2013

11.

Vidnes-Kopperud S, Tveit AB, Esplid I (2011) Changes in the treatment concept for approximal caries from 1983 to 2009 in Norway. Caries Res 45:113–120. doi:10.1159/000324810 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lynch CD, Guillem SE, Nagrani B, Gilmour AS, Ericson D (2010) Attitudes of some European dental undergraduate students to the placement of direct restorative materials in posterior teeth. J Oral Rehabil 37:916–926. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02119.x CrossRefPubMed

13.

Lynch CD, Frazier KB, Blum IR, Wilson NHF (2011) Minimally invasive management of dental caries: contemporary teaching of posterior resin-based composite placement in U.S. and Canadian dental schools. J Am Dent Assoc 142:612–620CrossRefPubMed

14.

Qvist V, Poulsen A, Teglers PT, Mjör IA (2010) The longevity of different restorations in primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 20:1–7. doi:10.1111/j.1365-263X.2009.01017.x CrossRefPubMed

15.

Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT (2004) Eight-year study on conventional glass ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth. Acta Odontol Scand 62:37–45CrossRefPubMed

16.

Qvist V, Manscher E, Teglers PT (2004) Resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth: 8-year results. J Dent 32:285–294CrossRefPubMed

17.

Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT (2004) Class II restorations in primary teeth: 7-year study on three resin-modified glass ionomer cements and a compomer. Eur J Oral Sci 112:188–196CrossRefPubMed

18.

Buerkle V, Kuehnisch J, Guelmann M, Hickel R (2005) Restoration materials for primary molars—results from a European survey. J Dent 33:275–281CrossRefPubMed

19.

Manhart J, Chen H, Hamm G, Hickel R (2004) Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent 29:481–508PubMed

20.

Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Loomans BA, Huysmans MC (2010) 12-year survival of composite vs. amalgam restorations. J Dent Res 89:1063–1067. doi:10.1177/0022034510376071 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Kopperud SE, Tveit AB, Gaarden T, Sandvik L, Esplid I (2012) Longevity of posterior dental restorations and reason for failure. Eur J Oral Sci 120:539–548CrossRefPubMed

22.

Pallesen U, Van Kijken JWV, Halken J, Hallonsten AL, Höigaard R (2014) A prospective 8-year follow-up of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth of children and adolescents in Public Dental Health Service: reasons for replacement. Clin Oral Investig 18:819–827. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-1052-x CrossRefPubMed

23.

Bücher K, Tautz A, Hickel R, Kühnisch J (2014) Longevity of composite restorations in patients with early childhood caries (ECC). Clin Oral Investig 18:775–782. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-1043-y CrossRefPubMed

24.

American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (2012) Guideline on pediatric restorative dentistry. Pediatr Dent 34:173–180

25.

Bundesministerium der Justiz Deutschland (1987) Verordnung über den Schutz vor Schäden durch Röntgenstrahlen (Röntgenverordnung - RöV). http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/r_v_1987/BJNR001140987.html. Accessed 29 Nov 2013

26.

Espelid I, Mejàre I, Weerheijm K, EAPD (2003) EAPD guidelines for use of radiographs in children. Eur J Paediatr Dent 4:40–48PubMed

27.

European Commission (2004) Radiation protection No. 136. European guidelines on radiation protection in dental radiology. The safe use of radiographs in dental practice. http://ec.europa.eu/energy/nuclear/radioprotection/publication/doc/136_en.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2013

28.

Hickel R, Peschke A, Tyas M, Mjör I, Bayne S, Peters M, Hiller KA, Randall R, Vanherle G, Heintze SD (2010) FDI World Dental Federation—clinical criteria for the evaluation of direct and indirect restorations. Update and clinical examples. J Adhes Dent 12:259–272. doi:10.3290/j.jad.a19262 PubMed

29.

Da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Cenci MS, Donassollo TA, Loguércio AD, Demarco FF (2006) A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent 34:427–435CrossRefPubMed

30.

Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BA (2007) Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations. J Adhes Dent 9:469–475PubMed

31.

Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Cenci MS, Huysmans MC, Wilson NH (2011) Age of failed restorations: a deceptive longevity parameter. J Dent 39:225–230. doi:10.1016/j.dent.2010.12.008 CrossRefPubMed

32.

Van de Sande FH, Opdam NJ, da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Correa MB, Demarco FF, Cenci MS (2013) Patient risk factors’ influence on survival of posterior composites. J Dent Res 92(7 Suppl):78S–83S. doi:10.1177/0022034513484337 CrossRefPubMed

33.

Attin T, Opatowski A, Meyer C, Zingg-Meyer B, Buchalla W, Mönting JS (2001) Three-year follow up assessment of class II restorations in primary molars with a polyacid-modified composite resin and a hybrid composite. Am J Dent 14:148–152PubMed

34.

DAJ (Deutsche Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Jugendzahnpflege) (2010) Epidemiologische Begleituntersuchung zur Gruppenprophylaxe 2009. DAJ, Bonn

35.

Thomson WM, Poulton R, Milne BJ, Caspi A, Broughton JR, Ayers KM (2004) Socioeconomic inequalities in oral health in childhood and adulthood in a birth cohort. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 32:345–353CrossRefPubMed

36.

Van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U (2011) Clinical performance of a hybrid resin composite with and without an intermediate layer of flowable resin composite: a 7-year evaluation. Dent Mater 27:150–156. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2010.09.010 CrossRefPubMed

37.

Eidelman E, Faibis S, Peretz B (2000) A comparison of restorations for children with early childhood caries treated under general anesthesia or conscious sedation. Pediatr Dent 22:33–37PubMed

38.

Angker L, Swain MV, Kilpatrick N (2003) Micro-mechanical characterization of the porperties of primary tooth dentine. J Dent 31:261–267CrossRefPubMed

39.

Papathanasiou AG, Curzon ME, Fairpo CG (1994) The influence of restorative material on the survival rate of restorations in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 16:282–288PubMed

40.

Brunthaler A, Konig F, Lucas T, Sperr W, Schedle A (2003) Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 7:63–70CrossRefPubMed

41.

Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ (2012) Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater 28:87–101. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003 CrossRefPubMed

42.

Andersson-Wenckert I, Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K (2006) Flowable resin composite as a class II restorative in primary molars: a two-year clinical evaluation. Acta Odontol Scand 64:334–340CrossRefPubMed

43.

Bernardo M, Luis H, Martin MD, Leroux BG, Rue T, Leitão J, DeRouen TA (2007) Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc 138:775–783CrossRefPubMed

44.

Köhler B, Rasmusson CG, Odman P (2000) A five-year clinical evaluation of class II composite resin restorations. J Dent 28:111–116CrossRefPubMed

45.

Soncini JA, Maserejian NN, Trachtenberg F, Tavares M, Hayes C (2007) The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings from the New England Children’s Amalgam Trial. J Am Dent Assoc 138:763–772CrossRefPubMed

46.

Alves dos Santos MP, Luiz RR, Maia LC (2010) Randomised trial of resin-based restorations in class I and class II beveled preparations in primary molars: 48-Month results. J Dent 38:451–459. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2010.02.004 CrossRefPubMed

47.

Loomans BA, Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, Bronkhorst EM, Burgersdijk RC, Dorfer CE (2006) A randomized clinical trial on proximal contacts of posterior composites. J Dent 34:292–297CrossRefPubMed

48.

Coppola MN, Ozcan YA, Bogacki R (2003) Evaluation of performance of dental providers on posterior restorations: does experience matter? A data envelopment analysis (DEA) approach. J Med Syst 27:445–456CrossRefPubMed

49.

Friedl KH, Hiller KA, Schmalz G (1995) Placement and replacement of composite restorations in Germany. Oper Dent 20:34–37PubMed

50.

Osorio R, Aguilera F, Otero P, Romero M, Osorio E, García-Godoy F, Toledano M (2010) Primary dentin etching time, bond strength and ultra-structure characterization of dentin surfaces. J Dent 38:222–231. doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2009.11.001 CrossRefPubMed

51.

Kaaden C, Schmalz G, Powers JM (2003) Morphological characterization of the resin-dentin interface in primary teeth. Clin Oral Investig 7:235–240CrossRefPubMed

52.

Krämer N, Tilch D, Lücker S, Frankenberger R (2014) Status of ten self-etch adhesives for bonding to dentin of primary teeth. Int J Paediatr Dent 24:192–199. doi:10.1111/ipd.12059 CrossRefPubMed

53.

Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, De Munck J, Peumans M, Yoshida Y, Poitevin A, Coutinho E, Suzuki K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B (2007) Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials 28:3757–3785CrossRefPubMed

54.

Van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U (2013) A six-year prospective randomized study of a nano-hybrid and a conventional hybrid resin composite in class II restorations. Dent Mater 29:191–198. doi:10.1016/j.dental.2012.08.013 CrossRefPubMed

55.

Krämer N, García-Godoy F, Reinelt C, Feilzer AJ, Frankenberger R (2011) Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities after six years. Dent Mater 27:455–464. doi:10.1016/j.dental2011.01.004 CrossRefPubMed

56.

Frankenberger N, Reinelt C, Krämer N (2014) Nanohybrid vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: 8-year-results. Clin Oral Investig 18:125–137. doi:10.1007/s00784-013-0957-8 CrossRefPubMed

57.

Clelland NL, Pagnotto MP, Kerby RE, Seghi RR (2005) Relative wear of flowable and highly filled composite. J Prosthet Dent 93:153–157CrossRefPubMed

58.

Boeckler A, Schaller HG, Gernhardt CR (2012) A prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial of a one-step, self-etch adhesive with and without an intermediary layer of a flowable composite: a 2-year evaluation. Quintessence Int 43:279–286PubMed

Title: Survival characteristics of composite restorations in primary teeth
Authors: Katharina Bücher
Isabel Metz
Vinay Pitchika
Reinhard Hickel
Jan Kühnisch
Publication date: 01-09-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 7/2015
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1389-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Survival characteristics of composite restorations in primary teeth

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2015

Periodontal treatment outcomes during pregnancy and postpartum

Erratum to: Biomechanical and histological evaluation of four different titanium implant surface modifications: an experimental study in the rabbit tibia

World Workshop on Oral Medicine VI: a systematic review of medication-induced salivary gland dysfunction: prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment

Effect of microparticulate silver addition in dental adhesives on secondary caries in vitro

Effect of bone graft density on in vitro cell behavior with enamel matrix derivative

Radiographic volume analysis as a novel tool to determine nasopalatine duct cyst dimensions and its association with presenting symptoms and postoperative complications