covid
Buscar en
Revista Portuguesa de Estomatologia, Medicina Dentária e Cirurgia Maxilofacial
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Portuguesa de Estomatologia, Medicina Dentária e Cirurgia Maxilofacial A Review of Amalgam and Composite Longevity of Posterior Restorations
Journal Information
Vol. 51. Issue 3.
Pages 155-164 (July - September 2010)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 51. Issue 3.
Pages 155-164 (July - September 2010)
Revisão
Open Access
A Review of Amalgam and Composite Longevity of Posterior Restorations
Visits
14532
Ana Catarina Soares
,
Corresponding author
ana_catarina_soares@hotmail.com

Correspondência para:.
, Alexandre Cavalheiro**
* Aluna de Pós-graduação Aperfeiçoamento em Medicina Dentária – Metodologias de Ensino em Dentisteria Operatória, Faculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade de Lisboa
** Professor e Regente de Dentisteria Operatória da Faculdade de Medicina Dentária da Universidade de Lisboa
This item has received

Under a Creative Commons license
Article information
Abstract

Failure of dental restorations is a major concern in dental practice and its replacement constitutes the majority of the operative work. The purpose of this study is to review the longevity of Class I and II amalgam and direct composite restorations in posterior permanent teeth, and to discuss possible reasons for clinical failure. On average, longevity of resin composite restorations in posterior teeth is two to three times lower than amalgam restorations. The resin composite is an appropriate material to restore small Class I and Class II lesions, with margins located in enamel, on patients with low caries risk and, when complete field isolation can be achieved. The use of amalgam is preferable to the use of composite in large and complex restorations, with margins located in dentine or cement, where isolation is deficient. Durability of dental restorations is dependent upon many different factors, such as: operator skills, materials used, technique used, patient compliance and oral environment. The main reasons for restorations failure were secondary caries, restoration fracture, tooth fracture and marginal defects.

Key-words:
Restorative dentistry
Longevity
Amalgam
Composite
Posterior teeth
Resumo

A falha das restaurações dentárias tornou-se uma das maiores preocupações na prática da medicina dentária e a sua substituição constitui a maior parte do trabalho do médico dentista generalista. Pretende-se com esta apresentação abordar a longevidade de restaurações em amálgama e resina composta em dentes posteriores permanentes, para as cavidades classe I e II, bem como as possíveis razões que podem levar à sua falha clínica. Em média, as restaurações em compósito nos dentes posteriores têm uma longevidade duas a três vezes menor do que as restaurações em amálgama. A resina composta é um material apropriado para a restauração de pequenas cavidades classe I e II com as margens localizadas em esmalte, em pacientes com baixo risco de cárie e nos casos em que o campo operatório pode ser adequadamente isolado. O uso da amálgama é preferível ao do compósito em restaurações extensas e complexas, com margens em dentina ou cemento, onde o isolamento é deficiente. A durabilidade das restaurações encontra-se dependente de vários factores, tais como: condicionantes do operador, material utilizado, técnica usada, colaboração do paciente bem como do ambiente da cavidade oral. As principais razões de falha são lesões de cárie secundária, fracturas do dente e da restauração e defeitos marginais.

Palavras-Chave:
Dentisteria restauradora
Longevidade
Amálgama
Compósito
Dentes posteriores
Full text is only aviable in PDF
References
[1.]
V. Qvist, J. Qvist, I. Mjör.
Placement and longevity of tooth-colored restorations in Denmark.
Acta Odontol Scand, 48 (1990), pp. 305-311
[2.]
M. Bernardo, H. Luis, M.D. Martin, B.G. Leroux, T. Rue, J. Leitão, A. DeRouen.
Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial.
J Am Dent Assoc, 138 (2007), pp. 775-783
[3.]
I.A. Mjör.
The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice.
Acta Odontol Scand, 55 (1997), pp. 58-63
[4.]
L. Levin, G. Samorodnitzky-Naveh, M. Coval, S.B. Geiger.
Despite all – do we have an appropriate substitute for amalgam?.
Refuat Hapeh Vehashinayim, 25 (2008), pp. 23-26
[5.]
A. Jokstad, I. Mjör.
Analyses of long-term clinical behavior of class-II amalgam restorations.
Acta Odontol Scand, 49 (1991), pp. 47-63
[6.]
L. Habekost, G. Camacho, E. Azevedo, F. Demarco.
Fracture resistance of thermal cycled and endodontically treated premolars with adhesive restorations.
J Prosthet Dent, 98 (2007), pp. 186-192
[7.]
T.J. Hilton.
a. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 1.
Am J Dent, 15 (2002), pp. 198-210
[8.]
T.J. Hilton.
b. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 2.
Am J Dent., 15 (2002), pp. 279-289
[9.]
H. Forss, E. Widström.
Reasons for restorative therapy and the longevity of restorations in adults.
Acta Odontol Scand, 62 (2004), pp. 82-86
[10.]
R. Mitchell, M. Koike, T. Okabe.
Posterior Amalgam Restorations – Usage, Regulation and Longevity.
Dent Clin N Am, 51 (2007), pp. 573-589
[11.]
K.F. Leinfelder.
Do restorations made of amalgam outlast those made of resin-based composite?.
J Am Dent Assoc, 131 (2000), pp. 1186-1187
[12.]
D. Ziskind, E. Mass, T. Watson.
Effect of different restorative materials on caries: A retrospective in vivo study.
Quintessence Int, 38 (2007), pp. 429-434
[13.]
J.G. Advokaat.
Pulp response to restorative materials.
Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd, 97 (1990), pp. 101-103
[14.]
T. Naito.
Postoperative Sensitivity in Posterior Composite Restorations is Relevant in Class II Cavities.
J Evid Base Dent Pract, 8 (2008), pp. 225-226
[15.]
E. Bjertness, T. Sønju.
Survival analysis of amalgam restorations in long-term recall patients.
Acta Odontol Scand, 48 (1990), pp. 93-97
[16.]
P. Rodolpho, M. Cenci, A. Donassollo, A. Loguércio, F. Demarco.
A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings.
[17.]
I.A. Mjör.
Problems and benefits associated with restorative materials: side-effects and long-term cost.
Adv Dent Res, 6 (1992), pp. 7-16
[18.]
J.A. Soncini, N.N. Maserejian, F. Trachtenberg, M. Tavares, C. Hayes.
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 (2007), pp. 763-772
[19.]
J.L. Drummond.
Degradation, Fatigue and Failure of Resin Dental Composite Materials.
J Dent Res, 87 (2008), pp. 710-719
[20.]
R. Rawls, J. Esquivel-Upshaw.
Resinas restauradores.
Phillips, Materiais Dentários, 11ª, pp. 376-417
[21.]
T. Roberson, H. Heymann, A. Ritter, P. Pereira.
Classes I, II and VI Direct Composite and Other Totth-Colored Restorations.
Sturdevant's Art⪼ience of Operative Dentistry, 4ª, pp. 539-567
[22.]
J. Kolker, P. Damiano, D. Caplan, S. Armstrong, D. Dawson, M. Jones, et al.
Teeth with large amalgam restorations and crowns, Factors affecting the receipt of subsequent treatment after 10 years.
J Am Dent Assoc, 136 (2005), pp. 738-748
[23.]
J. Manhart, H.Y. Chen, G. Hamm, R. Hickel.
Buonocore Memorial Lecture, Review of the Clinical Survival of Direct and Indirect Restorations in Posterior Teeth of the Permanent Dentition.
Oper Dent, 29 (2004), pp. 481-508
[24.]
R. Smales, W. Hawthorne.
Long-term survival of extensive amalgams and posterior crowns.
J Dent, 25 (1997), pp. 225-227
[25.]
J. Manhart, R. Hickel.
Longevity of Restorations.
Advances in Operative Dentistry, Volume 2: Challenges of the Future, 1st, pp. 336
[26.]
A. Brunthaler, F. König, T. Lucas, W. Sperr, A. Schedle.
Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth.
Clin Oral Investig, 7 (2003), pp. 63-70
[27.]
R.D. Jackson, M. Morgan.
The New Posterior Resins and a Simplified Placement Technique.
J Am Dent Assoc, 131 (2000), pp. 375-383
[28.]
S. Marshall, G. Marshall, K. Anusavice.
Amálgamas Dentárias.
Phillips, Materiais Dentários, 11ª, pp. 469-514
[29.]
C. Collins, R. Bryant, K. Hodge.
A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings.
J Dent, 26 (1998), pp. 311-317
[30.]
N. Opdam, E. Bronkhorst, J. Roeters, B. Loomans.
A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations.
[31.]
R. Hickel, J. Manhart.
Longevity of Restorations in posterior Teeth and Reasons for Failure.
J Adhesive Dent, 3 (2001), pp. 45-64
[32.]
O.M. El-Mowafy, D.W. Lewis, C. Benmergui, C. Levinton.
Meta-analysis on long-term clinical performance of posterior composite restorations.
J Dent, 22 (1994), pp. 33-43
[33.]
G. Moncada, E. Fernández, J. Martín, C. Arancibia, I. Mjör, V.V. Gordan.
Increasing the Longevity of Restorations by Minimal Intervention: A Two-year Clinical Trial.
Oper Dent, 33 (2008), pp. 258-264
[34.]
S. Petti, R. Pezzi, M.S. Cattaruzza, J.F. Osborn, A.S. D’Arca.
Restoration-related salivary Streptococcus mutans level: a dental cáries risk factor?.
J Dent, 25 (1997), pp. 257-262
[35.]
F.J. Gil, A. Espias, L.A. Sánchez, J.A. Planell.
Comparison of the abrasive wear resistance between amalgams, hybrid composite material and different dental cements.
Int Dent J, 49 (1999), pp. 337-342
[36.]
F. Lutz, R.W. Phillips, J.F. Roulett, J.C. Setcos.
In vivo and in vitro Wear of Potential Posterior Composites.
J Dent Res, 63 (1984), pp. 914-920
[37.]
K.F. Leinfelder, C.D. McCartha, J.F. Wisniewski.
Posterior composite resin. A critical review.
J Am Dent Assoc, 69 (1985), pp. 19-25
[38.]
L.N. Baratieri, A.V. Ritter, J. Perdigão, L.A. Felippe.
Direct Posterior Composite Resin Restorations: Current Concepts For The Technique.
Pract Periodont Aesthet Dent, 10 (1998), pp. 875-886
[39.]
H. Letzel, M.A. van’t Hof, G.W. Marshall, S.J. Marshall.
The influence of the amalgam alloy on the survival of amalgam restorations: a secondary analysis of multiple controlled clinical trials.
J Dent Res, 76 (1997), pp. 1787-1798
[40.]
B. Van Meerbeek, J. Munck, Y. Yoshida, S. Inoue, M. Vargas, P. Vijay, et al.
Buonocore Memorial Lecture Adhesion to Enamel and Dentin: Current Status and Future Challenges.
Oper Dent, 28 (2003), pp. 215-235
[41.]
J. De Munck, K. Van Landuyt, M. Peumans, A. Poitevin, P. Lambrechts, M. Braem, et al.
A Critical Review of the Durability of Adhesion to Tooth Tissue: Methods and Results.
J Dent Res, 84 (2005), pp. 118-132
[42.]
J. Van Dijken, C. Kieri, M. Carlén.
Longevity of Extensive Class II Open-sandwich Restorations with a Resin-modified Glassionomer Cement.
J Dent Res, 78 (1999), pp. 1319-1325
[43.]
W. Geurtsen, U. Schoeler.
A 4-year retrospective clinical study of Class I and Class II composite restorations.
J Dent, 25 (1997), pp. 229-232
[44.]
B. Köhler, C.-G. Rasmusson, P. Ödman.
A five-year clinical evaluation of Class II composite resin restorations.
J Dent, 28 (2000), pp. 111-116
[45.]
J. Manhart, F. García-Gogoy, R. Hickel.
Direct posterior restorations: clinical results and new developments.
Dent Clin North Am, 46 (2002), pp. 303-339
[46.]
J. Goldberg, J. Tanzer, E. Munster, J. Amara, F. Thal, D. Birkhed.
Cross-sectional clinical evaluation of recurrent enamel caries, restoration of marginal integrity, and oral hygiene status.
J Am Dent Assoc, 102 (1981), pp. 635-641
[47.]
R.J. Gruythuysen, C.M. Kreulen, H. Tobi, E. van Amerongen, H.B. Akerboom.
15-year evaluation of class II amalgam restorations.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 24 (1996), pp. 207-210
[48.]
J.H. De Vree, M.C. Peters, A.J. Plasschaert.
Clinical Science the Influence of Modification of Cavity Design on Distribution of Stresses in a Restored Molar.
J Dent Res, 63 (1984), pp. 1217
[49.]
C.M. Kreulen, H. Tobi, R.J.M. Gruythuysen, W.E. Van Amerongen, P.J. Borgmeijer.
Replacement risk of amalgam treatment modalities: 15-year results.
J Dent, 26 (1998), pp. 627-632
[50.]
J.P. Van Nieuwenhuysen, W. D’Hoore, J. Carvalho, V. Qvist.
Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth.
J Dent, 31 (2003), pp. 395-405
[51.]
A. Wilder, T. Roberson, P. Pereira, A. Ritter, K. May.
Classes I, II and VI Amalgam Restorations.
Sturdevant's Art⪼ience of Operative Dentistry, 4ª, pp. 671-739

(Soares AC, Cavalheiro A. A Review of Amalgam and Composite Longevity of Posterior Restorations. Rev Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac 2010;51:155–164)

Copyright © 2010. Sociedade Portuguesa de Estomatologia e Medicina Dentária
Download PDF
Article options
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos