ArticleThe journal of adhesive dentistry2024
Long-term Survival Rate and Clinical Quality of Individually Layered Indirect Composite Restorations in Adolescents and Young Adults.
Article in The journal of adhesive dentistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the survival and clinical quality of individually layered indirect composite restorations (ICRs) in the mixed and permanent dentition at two study centers. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 155 adhesively cemented ICRs in 34 participants (aged 6 to 50 years and treated between 2008 and 2018) were evaluated for survival and clinical quality. All were individually layered restorations fabricated from laboratory sculptable composites by a specialized dental technician. Two calibrated independent investigators examined and graded each restoration as success, survival with repair, or failure based on the FDI criteria. The marginal quality and gap width of the restorations were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy. The periodontal health of treated teeth (TT) was evaluated in comparison with that of unrestored control teeth (CT) by measuring the pocket depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), sulcus bleeding index (SBI), and the modified Turesky Plaque Index (TPI). A serial t-test (p 0.05) was used for statistical analysis of periodontal parameters. Success and functional survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.
resultsMolar incisor hypomineralization (MIH) was the most common indication for treatment (41%). The median age at treatment was 14.9 years (68%-CI: 7.7-29.5). The median service time of the restorations was 5.7 ± 3.4 years. 132 restorations were classified as a success, 21 as survival with repair, and 1 as a failure. The success rates at 1, 5, and 10 years were 95.4%, 87.4%, and 78.8%, respectively, and the corresponding functional survival rates were 100.0%, 98.9%, and 98.9%. The clinical quality, encompassing esthetic, functional, and biological criteria, was rated as excellent or good in over 90%. Periodontal response, however, was the only criterion showing worse results since restored teeth (TPI = 1.9) had significantly more plaque than CT (TPI = 1.7; p = 0.0001). No significant differences were observed in PD, CAL, or SBI. The mean marginal gap width was 135.7 µm and 63.8% of the restorations had perfect margins.
conclusionICRs are suitable for minimally invasive restoration of large tooth structure defects in the developing dentition of children and adolescents and for long-term temporary restoration of the adult dentition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.