Information about the long-term clinical survival of large amalgam and composite restorations is still lacking. This retrospective study compares the longevity of three- and four-/five-surface amalgam and composite restorations relative to patients’ caries risk. Patient records from a general practice were used for data collection. We evaluated 1949 large class II restorations (1202 amalgam/747 composite). Dates of placement, replacement, and failure were recorded, and caries risk of patients was assessed. Survival was calculated from Kaplan-Meier statistics. After 12 years, 293 amalgam and 114 composite restorations had failed. Large composite restorations showed a higher survival in the combined population and in the low-risk group. For three-surface restorations in high-risk patients, amalgam showed better survival.
AlanenPHurskainenKIsokangasPPietiläILevänenJSaarniUM. (1994). Clinician’s ability to identify caries risk subjects. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol22:86-89.
2.
Andersson-WenckertIEVan DijkenJWKieriC (2004). Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years. Am J Dent17:43-50.
3.
BaratieriLNRitterAV (2001). Four-year clinical evaluation of posterior resin-based composite restorations placed using the total-etch technique. J Esthet Restor Dent13:50-57.
4.
BernardoMLuisHMartinMDLerouxBGRueTLeitãoJ. (2007). Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial. J Am Dent Assoc138:775-783.
5.
ChuangSKTianLWeiLJDodsonTB (2001). Kaplan-Meier analysis of dental implant survival: a strategy for estimating survival with clustered observations. J Dent Res80:2016-2020.
6.
CollinsCJBryantRWHodgeKL (1998). A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations: 8-year findings. J Dent26:311-317.
7.
DaRosa RodolphoPACenciMSDonassolloTALoguércioADDemarcoFF (2006). A clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: 17-year findings. J Dent34:427-435.
8.
GaenglerPHoyerIMontagR (2001). Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: the 10-year report. J Adhes Dent3:185-194.
9.
GordanVVMondragonEWatsonREGarvanCMjörIA (2007). A clinical evaluation of a self-etching primer and a giomer restorative material: results at eight years. J Am Dent Assoc138:621-627.
10.
KöhlerBRasmussonCGOdmanP (2000). A five-year clinical evaluation of Class II composite resin restorations. J Dent28:111-116.
11.
LindbergAVan DijkenJWLindbergM (2007). Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities. J Dent35:124-129.
12.
MairLH (1998). Ten-year clinical assessment of three posterior resin composites and two amalgams. Quintessence Int29:483-490.
13.
ManhartJChenHHammGHickelR (2004). Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition. Oper Dent29:481-508.
14.
MannocciFQualtroughAJWorthingtonHVWatsonTFPitt FordTR (2005). Randomized clinical comparison of endodontically treated teeth restored with amalgam or with fiber posts and resin composite: five-year results. Oper Dent30:9-15.
15.
OpdamNJBronkhorstEMRoetersJMLoomansBA (2007a). A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations. Dent Mater23:2-8.
16.
OpdamNJBronkhorstEMRoetersJMLoomansBA (2007b). Longevity and reasons for failure of sandwich and total-etch posterior composite resin restorations. J Adhes Dent9:469-475.
17.
PallesenUQvistV (2003). Composite resin fillings and inlays. An 11-year evaluation. Clin Oral Investig7:71-79.
18.
RaskinAMichotte-TheallBVrevenJWilsonNH (1999). Clinical evaluation of a posterior composite 10-year report. J Dent27:13-19.
19.
RygeG (1980). Clinical criteria. Int Dent J30:347-358.
20.
SeppäLHausenHPöllänenLHelasharjuKKärkkäinenS (1989). Past caries recordings made in public dental clinics as predictors of caries prevalence in early adolescence. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol17:277-281.
21.
SonciniJAMaserejianNNTrachtenbergFTavaresMHayesC (2007). The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings from the New England Children’s Amalgam Trial. J Am Dent Assoc138:763-772.
22.
Van DijkenJWSunnegårdh-GrönbergK (2006). Fiber-reinforced packable resin composites in Class II cavities. J Dent34:763-769.
23.
Van NieuwenhuysenJPD’HooreWCarvalhoJQvistV (2003). Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent31:395-405.
