» Articles » PMID: 16924981

2-year Clinical Evaluation of Alternative Treatments to Replacement of Defective Amalgam Restorations

Overview
Journal Oper Dent
Date 2006 Aug 24
PMID 16924981
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of alternative treatments for replacing defective amalgam restorations through a prospective longitudinal cohort clinical study.

Methods: Forty-five patients aged 21 through 77 (mean=56) years with 113 defective amalgam restorations, which were independently diagnosed during treatment planning, participated in the study. These patients were assigned to 5 treatment groups: repair (n=20), sealing of defective margins (n=23), refurbishing (n=23), replacement (n=23) and no-treatment (n=24). The replacement and no-treatment groups served as comparison groups and received random assignment. Two clinicians examined the restorations (n=113) prior to and after the assigned treatment and at subsequent recalls, using a modified Ryge Criteria that included marginal adaptation, anatomy, contact, post-operative sensitivity and secondary caries.

Results: At 1- and 2-year recalls, 79 (70%) and 74 (65%) restorations were examined. Kruskal-Wallis Test showed significant differences for marginal adaptation and anatomic form for both 1- and 2- year recall exams (p<.05). The repair and replacement groups had significant differences when compared to the no-treatment group.

Conclusions: Defective restorations that have a Bravo rating for clinical characteristics other than marginal integrity and anatomical form do not need to be immediately replaced.

Citing Articles

Silane and acid etch cross contamination of dentin and composite reduced µ-tensile bond strength.

Eliasson S, Dahl J Biomater Investig Dent. 2024; 11:41933.

PMID: 39376699 PMC: 11457355. DOI: 10.2340/biid.v11.41933.


Comparison of Marginal Fracture Between Conventional and Bonded Amalgam Restorations in Posterior Permanent Molar Teeth.

Iqbal H, Rana S, Manzoor A, Nazir A, Akhtar M, Ghaffar H Cureus. 2023; 15(8):e44295.

PMID: 37779731 PMC: 10533950. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.44295.


Risk of failure of repaired versus replaced defective direct restorations in permanent teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Mendes L, Pedrotti D, Casagrande L, Lenzi T Clin Oral Investig. 2022; 26(7):4917-4927.

PMID: 35362754 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-022-04459-0.


Effectiveness of different resin composite materials for repairing noncarious amalgam margin defects.

Gumustas B, Sismanoglu S J Conserv Dent. 2018; 21(6):627-631.

PMID: 30546208 PMC: 6249941. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_34_18.


Micro-shear bond strength of universal adhesives used for amalgam repair with or without Alloy Primer.

Balkaya H, Demirbuga S, Cakir N, Karadas M, Zorba Y J Conserv Dent. 2018; 21(3):274-279.

PMID: 29899629 PMC: 5977775. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_290_17.