Subscribe to RSS
Please copy the URL and add it into your RSS Feed Reader.
https://www.thieme-connect.de/rss/thieme/en/10.1055-s-00000112.xml
Download PDF
ZWR - Das Deutsche Zahnärzteblatt 2003; 112(5): 205-214
DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-39465
DOI: 10.1055/s-2003-39465
Wissenschaft
Zahnerhaltung© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York
Überlebenszeitanalyse von konservierend-zahnärztlichen Restaurationen - Teil II: Direkte Füllungen aus Amalgam und Glasionomerzement im Seitenzahnbereich
Longevity of Dental Restorations - Part II: Amalgam and Glass Ionomer Restorations in Stress-bearing Posterior TeethFurther Information
Publication History
Publication Date:
26 May 2003 (online)
Zusammenfassung
Dieser Artikel analysiert die in der zahnärztlichen Fachliteratur publizierten klinischen Studien zu Amalgamfüllungen und Füllungen auf der Basis von Glasionomerzementen in Klasse-I- und -II-Kavitäten in Bezug auf Überlebenszeiten der Restaurationen und Faktoren, welche die Verweildauer im Mund begünstigen bzw. ein Risiko für frühzeitigen Füllungsverlust darstellen.
Summary
This article analyzes clinical studies on amalgam restorations and on glass ionomer restorations in stress-bearing class I and class II cavities with regard to longevity. Reasons for early restoration failure are discussed as well as factors which promote restoration success.
Schlüsselwörter
Überlebenszeitanalyse - Amalgam - Glasionomerzement - Seitenzahn - Risikofaktoren
Key Words
Longevity - Amalgam - Glass Ionomer Cement - Posterior Teeth - Risc Factors
Literatur
- 1 Allan DN. The durability of conservative restorations. Br Dent J. 1969; 126 172-177
- 2 Allan DN. A longitudinal study of dental restorations. Br Dent J. 1977; 143 87-89
- 3 Benz C, Stabel W, Mehl A, Hickel R. Clinical evaluation of modified glass ionomers in class II restorations. J Dent Res. 1997; 76 165
- 4 Bjertness E, Sonju T. Survival analysis of amalgam restorations in long-term recall patients. Acta Odontol Scand. 1990; 48 93-97
- 5 Burke FJT, Cheung SW, Mjör IA, Wilson NHF. Reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations in vocational training practices. Prim Dent Care. 1999; 6 17-20
- 6 Burke FJT, Cheung SW, Mjör IA, Wilson NHF. Restoration longevity and analysis of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations provided by vocational dental practitioners and their trainers in the United Kingdom. Quintessence Int. 1999; 30 234-242
- 7 Cichon P, Kerschbaum T. Verweildauer zahnärztlicher Restaurationen bei Behinderten. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1999; 54 96-102
- 8 Crabb HSM. The survival of dental restorations in a teaching hospital. Br Dent J. 1981; 150 315-318
- 9 Croll TP, Phillips RW. Six years experience with glass-ionomer-silver cermet cement. Quintessence Int. 1991; 22 783-793
- 10 Dahl JE, Eriksen HM. Reasons for replacement of amalgam dental restorations. Scand J Dent Res. 1978; 86 404-407
- 11 Doglia R, Herr P, Holz J, Baume J L. Clinical evaluation of four amalgam alloys: A five-year report. J Prosthet Dent. 1986; 56 406-415
- 12 Easton GS. Causes and prevention of amalgam failures. J Am Dent Assoc. 1941; 28 392-400
- 13 Forsten L, Mount GJ, Knight G. Observations in Australia of the use of glass ionomer cement restorative material. Aust Dent J. 1994; 39 339-343
- 14 Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. Atraumatic restorative treatment and glass ionomer sealants in a school oral health programme in Zimbabwe: Evaluation after 1 year. Caries Res. 1996; 30 428-433
- 15 Frencken JE, Makoni F, Sithole WD. ART restorations and glass ionomer sealants in Zimbabwe: Survival after 3 years. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998; 26 372-381
- 16 Frencken JE, Songpaisan Y, Phantumvanit P, Pilot T. An atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique: Evaluation after one year. Int Dent J. 1994; 44 460-464
- 17 Hasselrot L. Tunnel restorations. A 3 1/2-year follow up study of Class I and II tunnel restorations in permanent and primary teeth. Swed Dent J. 1993; 17 173-182
- 18 Hasselrot L. Tunnel restorations in permanent teeth. A 7 year follow up study. Swed Dent J. 1998; 22 1-7
- 19 Hawthorne WS, Smales RJ. Factors influencing long-term restoration survival in three private dental practices in Adelaide. Aust Dent J. 1997; 42 59-63
- 20 Healey HJ, Phillips RW. A clinical study of amalgam failures. J Dent Res. 1949; 28 439-446
- 21 Hickel R. Moderne Füllungswerkstoffe. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1997; 52 572-585
- 22 Hickel R, Dasch W, Janda R, Tyas M, Anusavice K. New direct restorative materials. Int Dent J. 1998; 48 3-16
- 23 Hickel R, Manhart J. Glass-ionomers and compomers in pediatric dentistry. 1999; 201-226
- 24 Hickel R, Petschelt A, Maier J, Voß A, Sauter M. Nachuntersuchung von Füllungen mit Cermet-Zement (Ketac-Silver). Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1988; 43 851-853
- 25 Ho TFT, Smales RJ, Fang DTS. A 2-year clinical study of two glass ionomer cements used in the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1999; 27 195-201
- 26 Hunt PR. A modified class II cavity preparation for glass ionomer restorative materials. Quintessence Int. 1984; 10 1011-1018
- 27 Hunt PR. Microconservative restorations for approximal carious lesions. J Am Dent Assoc. 1990; 120 37-40
- 28 Jokstad A, Mjör IA. Analyses of long-term clinical behavior of class-II amalgam restorations. Acta Odontol Scand. 1991; 49 47-63
- 29 Jokstad A, Mjör IA. Replacement reasons and service time of class II amalgam restorations in relation to cavity design. Acta Odontol Scand. 1991; 49 109-126
- 30 Jokstad A, Mjör IA, Qvist V. The age of restorations in situ. Acta Odontol Scand. 1994; 52 234-248
- 31 Kamann WK, Gängler P. Zur Funktionszeit von Amalgam-, Komposite- und Goldhämmerfüllungen. ZWR. 1999; 108 270-273
- 32 Klausner LH, Charbeneau GT. Amalgam restorations: A cross-sectional survey of placement and replacement. J Mich Dent Assoc. 1985; 67 249-252
- 33 Krämer N, Kunzelmann KH, Pollety T, Pelka M, Hickel R. Langzeiterfahrungen mit Cermet-Zementfüllungen in Klasse-I/II-Kavitäten. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1994; 49 905-909
- 34 Kreulen CM, Tobi H, Gruythuysen RJM, van Amerongen WE, Borgmeijer PJ. Replacement risk of amalgam treatment modalities: 15-year results. J Dent. 1998; 26 627-632
- 35 Lavelle CLB. A cross-sectional survey into the durability of amalgam restorations. J Dent. 1976; 4 139-143
- 36 Letzel H, van-'t-Hof MA, Marshall GW, Marshall SJ. The influence of the amalgam alloy on the survival of amalgam restorations: A secondary analysis of multiple controlled clinical trials. J Dent Res. 1997; 76 1787-1798
- 37 Letzel H, van-'t-Hof MA, Vrijhoef MM, Marshall-GW J, Marshall J S. A controlled clinical study of amalgam restorations: Survival, failures, and causes of failure. Dent Mater. 1989; 5 115-121
- 38 Letzel H, van-'t-Hof MA, Vrijhoef MMA, Marshall GW, Marshall SJ. Failure, survival, and reasons for replacement of amalgam restorations. In: Anusavice K (ed.). Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co. 1989; 83-94
- 39 Mahmood S, Smales RJ. Longevity of dental restorations in selected patients from different practice environments. Aust Dent J. 1994; 39 15-17
- 40 Mair LH. Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and two amalgams. Quintessence Int. 1998; 29 483-490
- 41 Mallow P, Durward C, Klaipo M. Comparison of two glass ionomer cements using the ART technique. J Dent Res. 1995; 74 405
- 42 Mallow PK, Durward CS, Klaipo M. Restoration of permanent teeth in young rural children in Cambodia using the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) technique and Fuji II glass ionomer cement. Int J Paediatr. 1998; 8 35-40
- 43 Manhart J, Hickel R. Longevity of restorations. In: Wilson N H F, Roulet J F, Fuzzi M (eds.). Advances in operative dentistry. Challenges of the future. Quintessence Publishing Co., Berlin. 2001; 237-304
- 44 Martin JA, Bader JD. Five-year treatment outcomes for teeth with large amalgams and crowns. Oper Dent. 1997; 22 72-78
- 45 Maryniuk GA, Kaplan SH. Longevity of restorations: Survey results of dentists' estimates and attitudes. J Am Dent Assoc. 1986; 112 39-45
- 46 McLean JW, Gasser O. Glass-cermet cements. Quintessence Int. 1985; 16 333-343
- 47 Mjör IA. Placement and replacement of restorations. Oper Dent. 1981; 6 49-54
- 48 Mjör IA. Amalgam and composite resin resin restorations: Longevity and reasons for replacement. In: Anusavice K (ed.). Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co. 1989; 61-80
- 49 Mjör IA. Long term cost of restorative therapy using different materials. Scand J Dent Res. 1992; 100 60-65
- 50 Mjör IA. Problems and benefits associated with restorative materials: Side-effects and long-term cost. Adv Dent Res. 1992; 6 7-16
- 51 Mjör IA. Repair versus replacement of failed restorations. Int Dent J. 1993; 43 466-472
- 52 Mjör IA. Glass ionomer restorations and secondary caries. A preliminary report. Quintessence Int. 1996; 27 171-174
- 53 Mjör IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997; 55 58-63
- 54 Mjör IA, Jokstad A. Five-year study of Class II restorations in permanent teeth using amalgam, glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cerment and resin-based composite materials. J Dent. 1993; 21 338-343
- 55 Mjör IA, Jokstad A, Qvist V. Longevity of posterior restorations. Int Dent J. 1990; 40 11-17
- 56 Mjör IA, Toffenetti F. Placement and replacement of amalgam restorations in Italy. Oper Dent. 1992; 17 70-73
- 57 Moffa JP. Comparative performance of amalgam and composite resin restorations and criteria for their use. In: Anusavice K (ed.). Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co. 1989; 125-133
- 58 Mount GJ. Longevity in glass-ionomer restorations: Review of a successful technique. Quintessence Int. 1997; 28 643-650
- 59 Nicolaisen S, von der Fehr FR, Lunder N, Thomsen I. Performance of tunnel restorations at 3-6 years. J Dent. 2000; 28 383-387
- 60 Osborne JW, Binon PP, Gale EN. Dental amalgam: clinical behavior up to eight years. Oper Dent. 1980; 5 24-28
- 61 Osborne JW, Normann RD, Gale EN. A 14-year clinical assessment of 12 amalgam alloys. Quintessence Int. 1991; 22 857-864
- 62 Papa J, Wilson PR, Tyas MJ. Tunnel restorations: A review. J Esthet Dent. 1992; 4 4-9
- 63 Paterson N. The longevity of restorations. Br Dent J. 1984; 157 23-25
- 64 Phantumvanit P, Songpaisan Y, Pilot T, Frencken JE. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART): A three-year community field trial in Thailand - survival of one-surface restorations in the permanent dentition. J Public Health Dent. 1996; 56 141-145
- 65 Pieper K, Meyer G, Marienhagen B, Motsch A. Eine Langzeitstudie an Amalgam- und Kunststoff-Füllungen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z. 1991; 46 222-225
- 66 Pilebro CE, van Dijken JWV. Analysis of factors affecting failure of glass cermet tunnel restorations in a multi-center study. Clin Oral. 2001; 5 96-101
- 67 Plasmans PJ, Creugers NH, Mulder J. Long-term survival of extensive amalgam restorations. J Dent Res. 1998; 77 453-460
- 68 Qvist J, Qvist V, Mjör IA. Placement and longevity of amalgam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand. 1990; 48 297-303
- 69 Qvist V, Qvist J, Mjör IA. Placement and longevity of tooth-colored restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand. 1990; 48 305-311
- 70 Qvist V, Thylstrup A, Mjör IA. Restorative treatment pattern and longevity of amalgam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand. 1986; 44 343-349
- 71 Richardson AS, Boyde MA. Replacement of silver amalgam restorations by 50 dentists during 246 working days. Can Dent Assoc J. 1973; 39 556-559
- 72 Robinson AD. The life of a filling. Br Dent J. 1971; 130 206-208
- 73 Roulet JF. Esthetic posterior restorations. 1995; Proceedings of the International Symposium, Bologna, 18. November. 1995; 27-47
- 74 Roulet JF. Benefits and disadvantages of tooth-coloured alternatives to amalgam. J Dent. 1997; 25 459-473
- 75 Roulet JF. Longevity of glass ceramic inlays and amalgam - results up to 6 years. Clin Oral Invest. 1997; 1 40-46
- 76 Setcos JC, Staninec M, Wilson NHF. A two-year randomized, controlled clinical evaluation of bonded amalgam restorations. J Adhesive Dent. 1999; 1 323-331
- 77 Smales RJ. Longevity of cusp-covered amalgams: Survivals after 15 years. Oper Dent. 1991; 16 17-20
- 78 Smales RJ, Gerke DC, White IL. Clinical evaluation of occlusal glass ionomer, resin, and amalgam restorations. J Dent. 1990; 18 243-249
- 79 Smales RJ, Hawthorne WS. Long-term survival and cost-effectiveness of five dental restorative materials used in various classes of cavity preparations. Int Dent J. 1996; 46 126-130
- 80 Smales RJ, Hawthorne WS. Long-term survival of extensive amalgams and posterior crowns. J Dent. 1997; 25 225-227
- 81 Smales RJ, Webster DA, Leppard PI. Survival predictions of amalgam restorations. J Dent. 1991; 19 272-277
- 82 Smales RJ, Webster DA, Leppard PI. Survival predictions of four types of dental restorative materials. J Dent. 1991; 19 278-282
- 83 Strand GV, Nordbo H, Leirskar J, von der Fehr FR, Eide GE. Tunnel restorations placed in routine practice and observed for 24 to 54 months. Quintessence Int. 2000; 31 453-460
- 84 Strand GV, Nordbo H, Tveit AB, Espelid I, Wikstrand K, Eide GE. A 3-year clinical study of tunnel restorations. Eur J Oral Sci. 1996; 104 384-389
- 85 Summitt JB, Burgess JO, Berry TG. et al. . The performance of bonded vs.pin-retained complex amalgam restorations. A five-year clinical evaluation. J Am Dent Assoc. 2001; 132 923-931
- 86 Svanberg M. Class II amalgam restorations, glass-ionomer tunnel restorations, and caries development on adjacent tooth surfaces: A 3-year clinical study. Caries Res. 1992; 26 315-318
- 87 Welbury RR, Walls AW, Murray JJ, McCabe JF. The management of occlusal caries in permanent molars. A 5-year clinical trial comparing a minimal composite with an amalgam restoration. Br Dent J. 1990; 169 361-366
- 88 Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass-ionomer cement. Quintessence Publishing Co., Chicago. 1988;
- 89 Wilson MA, Cowan AJ, Randall RC, Crisp RJ, Wilson NHF. A practice-based randomized, controlled clinical trial of a new resin composite restorative: One-year results. Oper Dent. 2002; 27 423-429
- 90 Wilson NHF, Burke FJT, Mjör IA. Reasons for placement and replacement of restorations of direct restorative materials by a selected group of practitioners in the United Kingdom. Quintess Int. 1997; 28 245-248
- 91 Wilson NHF, Wastell DG, Norman RD. Five-year performance of high-copper content amalgam restorations in a multiclinical trial of a posterior composite. J Dent. 1996; 24 203-210
- 92 Wolcott RB. Failures in dental amalgam. J Am Dent Assoc. 1958; 56 479-491
- 93 Yip KHK, Smales RJ, Gao W, Peng D. The effect of two cavity preparation methods on the longevity of glass ionomer cement restorations. An evaluation after 12 months. J Am Dent Assoc. 2002; 133 744-751
Korrespondenzadresse
OA Dr. J. Manhart
Poliklinik für Zahnerhaltung und Parodontologie
Goethestraße 70, 80336 München
Fax: 089/5160-5344
Email: manhart@manhart.com
URL: http://www.manhart.com