A 3-year clinical evaluation of two composite resins in class-II cavities

References

• Qvist V, Qvist J, Mjiir IA. Placement and longevity of tooth-coloured restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand 1990; 48:305–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferracane JL. Using posterior composites appropriately. J Am Dent Assoc 1992;123:53–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen ME, Chan DCN. Polymerization shrinkage and micro-leakage. In: Vanherle G, Smith DC, editors. Posterior composite resin dental restorative materials. Utrecht: Szulc; 1985. p. 243–62.
   Google Scholar
• Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Curing contraction of com-posites and glass ionomer cements. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:298–310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rees JS, Jacobsen PH. The polymerization shrinkage of com-posite resins. Dent Mater 1989;5:41–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergenholtz G, Cox CF, Loeche\NJ, Syed SA. Bacteria leakage around dental restorations: its effect on the dental pulp. J Oral Pathol 1982;11:439–50.
   Google Scholar
• Heitman T, Asmussen E. Spaltfria kompositfyllningar. Tandla-kartidningen 1992;4:178–80.
   Google Scholar
• Carlsson GE, Johansson A, Lundqvist S. Occlusal wear. Acta Odontol Scand 1985;43:83–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birkhed D, Heintze U. Salivary secretion rate, buffer capacity and pH. In: Tenovuo JO, editor. Human saliva: clinical chemistry and microbiology. Vol 1. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press, Inc.; 1989. p. 25–73.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins GN. Saliva. In: Jenkins GN, editor. The physiology of the mouth. 3rd ed. rev. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1970. p. 289–357.
   Google Scholar
• Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Celis JP, Vanherle G. A classification of dental composites according to their morpho-logical mechanical characteristics. Dent Mater 1992;8:310–9.
   Google Scholar
• Braem M. Young's modulus determination. In: An in vitro investigation into the physical durability of dental composites [thesis]. Leuven: Acco; 1985. p. 85–116.
   Google Scholar
• Willems G, Noack MJ, Inokoshi S, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, et al. Radiopacity of composites compared with human enamel and dentine. J Dent 1991;19:362–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundin S-A, Andersson B, Koch G, Rasmusson CG. Class II composite resin restorations: a three-year clinical study of six different posterior composites. Swed Dent J 1990;14:105–14.
   Google Scholar
• Ryge G, Snyder M. Evaluating the clinical quality of restora-tions. J Am Dent Assoc 1973;87:369–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leinfelder KF, Taylor DF, Barkmaeier WW, Goldberg AJ. Quantitative wear measurement of posterior composite resins. Dent Mater 1986;2:198–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moller AJR. Microbiological examination of root canals and periapical tissues of human teeth. Odontol Tidskr 1966;74 (Spec Issue 5–6).
   Google Scholar
• Rogosa M, Mitchell J, Wieseman R. A selective medium for the isolation and enumeration of oral lactobacilli. J Dent Res 1951; 30:682–9.
   Google Scholar
• Westergren G, Krasse B. Evaluation of a micromethod for determination of Streptococcus mutctns and lactobacilli infection. J Clin Microbiol 1978;7:82–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson G, Mandrajieff M, Brindock T. Controversies in posterior composite resin restorations. Dent Clin North Am 1990;34:27–44.
   Google Scholar
• Horstedt-Bindslev P. Klasse I og II kaviteter. Dan Dent J 1987; 12:550–4.
   Google Scholar
• Vanherle G, Lambrechts P, Braem M. Overview of clinical requirements for posterior composites. In: Vanherle G, Smith DC, editors. Posterior composite resin dental restorative materials. Utrecht: Szulc; 1985. p. 21–40.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmusson CG, Lundin S-A. Class II restorations in composite resins. Swed Dent J 1995;19:173–82.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mjiir IA. The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice. Acta Odontol Scand 1997;55:58–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wassell RW, Walls AWG, McCabe JF. Direct composite inlays versus conventional composite restorations: three-year clinical results. Br Dent J 1995;179:343–9.
   Google Scholar
• Lundin S-A, Koch G. Class I and II composite resin restorations: a 4-year clinical follow up. Swed Dent J 1989;13: 217–27.
   Google Scholar
• Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vanherle G. Three-year follow up of five posterior composites: in vivo wear. J Dent 1993;21:74–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiderholm K-J. Filler systems and resins interface. In: Vanherle G, Smith DC, editors. Posterior composite resin dental restorative materials. Utrecht: Szulc; 1985. p. 139–59.
   Google Scholar
• Mc Kinney JE, Wu W. Chemical softening and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res 1985;64:1326–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgmeijer PJ, Kreulen CM, van Amerongen WE, Akerboom HBM, Gruythuysen RJM. The prevalence of postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations. J Dent Child 1991;September-October:378–83.
   Google Scholar
• El-Mowafy OM, Levis DW, Benmergui C, Levinton C. Meta analysis on long-term clinical performance of posterior composite restorations. J Dent 1994;22:23–43.
   Google Scholar