Jukka Leinonen, Hannu Vähänikkilä, Remo Luksepp, Vuokko Anttonen
{"title":"使用和不使用基底填充复合材料的二级修复体的五年存活率：一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Jukka Leinonen, Hannu Vähänikkilä, Remo Luksepp, Vuokko Anttonen","doi":"10.1007/s00784-024-05965-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.</p>","PeriodicalId":10461,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Oral Investigations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11439851/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Jukka Leinonen, Hannu Vähänikkilä, Remo Luksepp, Vuokko Anttonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00784-024-05965-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10461,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11439851/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Oral Investigations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05965-z\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Oral Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-024-05965-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Five-year survival of class II restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite: a retrospective cohort study.
Objective: This study aimed to determine the survival of class II composite restorations in premolars and molars with and without base bulk-fill composite in general dental practice.
Materials and methods: We collected data from the electronic patient files of the Public Dental Services in the City of Oulu, Finland. The timespan of data collection was from August 15th, 2002, to August 9th, 2018. The data consisted of class II composite restorations both with and without base bulk-fill composite. We compared the survival of these restorations using Kaplan-Meier survival curves, the log-rank test, survival rates, and the Wilcoxon signed ranks test.
Results: We observed 297 restorations in 96 patients. The five-year survival rates for restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite were comparable in premolars (77.5% and 77.4%, respectively) but different in molars (69.9% and 57.8%, respectively, p = 0.069). In molars, the restorations with base bulk-fill composite exhibited a higher survival rate in 14 patients, whereas in 11 patients the restorations without base bulk-fill composites exhibited a higher survival rate. In 24 patients the survival rates were similar for restorations with and without the base bulk-fill composite (p = 0.246).
Conclusions: The restorations with and without base bulk-fill composite had similar longevity.
Clinical relevance: Base bulk-fill composites are safe to use in general practice due to their similar survival rates compared to conventional composites.
期刊介绍：
The journal Clinical Oral Investigations is a multidisciplinary, international forum for publication of research from all fields of oral medicine. The journal publishes original scientific articles and invited reviews which provide up-to-date results of basic and clinical studies in oral and maxillofacial science and medicine. The aim is to clarify the relevance of new results to modern practice, for an international readership. Coverage includes maxillofacial and oral surgery, prosthetics and restorative dentistry, operative dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics, dental materials science, clinical trials, epidemiology, pedodontics, oral implant, preventive dentistiry, oral pathology, oral basic sciences and more.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
