Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30368661›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2019

Is composite repair suitable for anterior restorations? A long-term practice-based clinical study.

Françoise H van de Sande, Rafael R Moraes, Raquel V Elias, Anelise F Montagner, Paulo A Rodolpho, Flávio F Demarco, Maximiliano S Cenci

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Analysis of Cosmetic Effect of Nanocomposite Resin on Anterior Teeth.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2021
    Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Françoise H van de SandePrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.
Rafael R MoraesPrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.
Raquel V EliasPrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.
Anelise F MontagnerPrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Rua Marechal Floriano Peixoto, 1184, Santa Maria, RS, 97015-372, Brazil. animontag@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1586-2335
Paulo A RodolphoClínica Odontológica, Av. Duque de Castilhos, 1348, s. 203, Caxias do Sul, RS, 95010-000, Brazil.
Flávio F DemarcoPrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.
Maximiliano S CenciPrograma de Pós-graduação em Odontologia, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas, RS, 96015-560, Brazil.

Funding

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study investigated the impact in survival, when repair is seen as failure or not, in anterior composite restorations with a retrospective 15-year follow-up study. MATERIALS AND

methodsData was collected from patients' files of a private dental practice, including patients with direct composite restorations placed in anterior teeth (class III, class IV, or veneer) between January 1994 and December 2009. Data were analyzed considering or not repair as failure. Statistical analysis was performed with log rank test, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression (p < .05).

resultsOne hundred forty-four patients' files were included, with 634 restorations. At 15 years, Class III / IV restorations showed 69% survival and 2.4% annual failure rate (AFR) when repair was not considered as failure, and 64% and 2.9% AFR, respectively, when repair was seen as failure. For direct veneers, at 5 and 10 years of follow-up, survival dropped from 85% to 74% and from 52% to 38% respectively, when repair was considered as failure. In general, restorations placed in the upper jaw showed increased risk for failure compared to the lower jaw (p < .01), and restorations in central incisors presented a higher risk for failure compared to canines (p < .01).

conclusionComposite repair seems a suitable alternative for class III, class IV, and veneer restorations since it was able to increase the survival of restorations performed in anterior teeth. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Composite repair for anterior restorations is a suitable restorative treatment option and presents benefits over replacement, including the preservation of sound tooth structures, reduced clinical chair time, and patient anxiety.

Indexed as

Composite ResinsDental Restoration FailureDental Restoration, PermanentFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesComposite ResinsComposite resinsDental restorationRepairRetrospective studyRisk factorsSurvival

Identifiers

PMID30368661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.