RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF RESTORATION OF TEETH WITH DAMAGE TO CONTACT SURFACES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35220/2078-8916-2022-45-3.11Keywords:
lateral teeth, contact surfaces, direct restoration, photocomposites, glass ionomer cements,Abstract
Purpose of the study. Retrospective clinical assessment of the state of direct tooth restorations with damage to the contact surfaces. Research materials and methods. 54 patients aged 23 to 35 years were examined, in which the clinical condition of 189 previously performed direct restorations of lateral teeth with lesions of the contact surfaces was evaluated, among them there were 135 photocomposite restorations (71.4%) and 54 restorations (28.6%) performed in the open "sandwich-technique" using photocomposites and glass ionomer cements. All studied restorations covered the occlusal and one of the contact surfaces of the lateral teeth. The condition of the restorations was evaluated separately on the occlusal and contact surfaces according to adapted clinically relevant criteria. The results. The most frequent violations in photocomposite restorations and in restorations performed in the open "sandwich-technique" related to the condition of the contact point, defects in the marginal fit of the restorative materials and the presence of marginal staining at the border of restorations on the parietal wall, secondary caries of this location, as well as marginal adjacency at the border two materials. Indicators of the number of detected violations in restorations made by both clinical technologies differed insignificantly in relative values. Conclusions. In direct restorations of lateral teeth with damage to the contact surfaces, a high number of violations according to adapted criteria was established according to a retrospective clinical assessment. The clinical technology of direct restoration using the open "sandwich-technique" requires further study and improvement.
References
Борисенко А. В., Неспрядько В. П., Борисенко Д. А. Композиционные пломбировочные и облицовочные материалы: учебное пособие. Киев : ВСИ «Медицина», 2015. 320 с.
ADA Council on Scientific Affairs. Direct and indirect restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003. № 134(4). P. 463-472. doi:10.14219/jada. archive.2003.0196.
Van Dijken, J. W. V., Pallesen, U. Clinical performance of a hybrid resin composite with and without an intermediate layer of flowable resin composite: A 7-year evaluation. Dental Materials. 2011. № 27 (2). 150–156. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.09.010
Mahmoud, S., El-Embaby, A., AbdAllah, A. Clinical Performance of Ormocer, Nanofilled, and Nanoceramic Resin Composites in Class I and Class II Restorations: A Three-year Evaluation. Operative Dentistry. 2014. № 39 (1). 32–42. doi: http://doi.org/10.2341/12-313-c
Удод О. А., Костенко Р. С. Прямі та непрямі реставрації зубів: клінічний стан і оцінка. Вісник стоматології. 2020. № 110(1). С. 26-30. doi:10.35220/2078-8916-2020-35-1-26-30.
Биденко Н. В. Стеклоиономерные материалы в стоматологии. Киев : «Книга-Плюс», 2003. 144 с.
Ryge G. Клинические критерии. Клин. Стоматология. 1998. №(3). С. 40-46.