Abstract
Objectives The aims of this study were (i) to assess cumulative survival rates of class II resin-based composite and compomer restorations in primary molars with a 5-year observation period and (ii) to analyze the influence of different types of anesthesia and different localizations of the restorations in the teeth. Methods Patient charts of a private practice for pediatric dentistry were ...
Abstract
Objectives The aims of this study were (i) to assess cumulative survival rates of class II resin-based composite and compomer restorations in primary molars with a 5-year observation period and (ii) to analyze the influence of different types of anesthesia and different localizations of the restorations in the teeth. Methods Patient charts of a private practice for pediatric dentistry were screened for class II resin-based composite (Spectrum TPH3) and compomer (Dyract Posterior; both Dentsply DeTrey) restorations in primary molars with a 5-year observation period used with Adper Prompt L-Pop (3M-ESPE). One restoration per patient (age <= 6 years at placement) was randomly selected. Results Two hundred sixty restorations were included (43% resin-based composites, 57% compomers). After 5 years, cumulative survival rates were 43% for resin-based composite and 49% for compomer restorations with no statistically significant differences. There was a tendency for higher survival rates for restorations placed under N2O inhalation sedation or general anesthesia. Distal-occlusal compomer restorations showed significantly lower survival rates (p = 0.003) as compared to mesial-occlusal compomer restorations. Conclusion Within the limitations of the study, we conclude that type of restorative material as well as the type of anesthesia do not influence restoration survival rates, although restorations placed in patients receiving N2O inhalation sedation or general anesthesia tend to perform better as compared with patients receiving no anesthesia or only local infiltration.
Altmetric