Dental Materials
Volume 25, Issue 5 , Pages 605-620, May 2009

Marginal adaptation in vitro and clinical outcome of Class V restorations

  • S.D. Heintze

      Affiliations

    • R&D, Ivoclar Vivadent AG, Bendererstrasse 2, FL-9494 Schaan, Liechtenstein
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +423 235 3570; fax: +423 233 1279.
  • ,
  • U. Blunck

      Affiliations

    • Charité Berlin, Department of Operative Dentistry, Dental School, Berlin, Germany
  • ,
  • T.N. Göhring

      Affiliations

    • University of Zurich, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, Clinic of Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology, Zurich, Switzerland
  • ,
  • V. Rousson

      Affiliations

    • Biostatistics Unit, Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, Switzerland

Received 21 July 2008; accepted 10 November 2008.

Abstract 

Objectives

We examined the correlation between the quantitative margin analysis of two laboratory test methods (Berlin, Zurich) and the clinical outcome in Class V restorations.

Methods

Prospective clinical studies with an observation period of at least 18 months were searched in the literature, for which laboratory data were also available. The clinical outcome variables were retention loss, marginal discoloration, detectable margins and secondary caries. Forty-four clinical studies matched the inclusion criteria, including 34 adhesive systems for which laboratory data were also present. For both laboratory test methods and the clinical studies, an index was formulated to better compare the in vitro and in vivo results. Linear mixed models which included a random study effect were calculated. As most clinical data were available for 12 and 24 months, the main analysis was restricted to these recall intervals.

Results

The comparative analysis revealed a weak correlation between the clinical index and both in vitro indices. The correlation was statistically significant for the Berlin method but not for the Zurich method and only present if studies were compared which used the same composite in the in vitro and in vivo study. When defining specific cut-off values, the prognosis for the good clinical performance of an adhesive system based on in vitro results was 78% (Berlin) or 100% (Zurich). For poor performance it was 67% and 60%, respectively. No correlation was found between both in vitro methods.

Significance

The surrogate parameter “marginal adaptation” of restorations placed in extracted teeth has a mediocre value to predict the clinical performance of an adhesive system in cervical cavities. The composite is an important factor for a successful prediction. The comparison between in vitro/in vivo is sometimes hampered by the great variability of clinical results on the same adhesive system.

Keywords: Adhesive system, Marginal adaptation, in vitro, in vivo, Class V

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0109-5641(08)00275-3

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2008.11.004

Dental Materials
Volume 25, Issue 5 , Pages 605-620, May 2009