One-Year Clinical Evaluation of Class II Indirect Porcelain, Hybrid and Composite Blocks Restorations

one-year clinical assessment of class ii amalgam restorations

0

Conservative porcelain indirect restorations.

Microleakage Evaluation of Class II Composite Resin Restorations with Different Thicknesses of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer

Background and Aim: One of the weaknesses of Class II composite resin restorations is gingival microleakage which contributes to postoperative sensitivity and secondary caries. The aim was to evaluate the microleakage in Class II composite resin restorations with different thicknesses of resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI). Materials and Methods: In this in-vitro study, standardized Class II s...

Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results.

AIM The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of direct resin composite restorations (Tetric Ceram-TC) and indirect composite inlays (Targis-TG) after 12 months. METHODS AND MATERIALS Seventy-six Class I and II restorations (44 direct and 32 indirect) were inserted in premolars and molars with carious lesions or deficient restorations in 30 healthy patients according to t...

15-year evaluation of Class II amalgam restorations.

In a clinical trial, 1544 Class II amalgam restorations were inserted. In this study 1213 restorations were evaluated after 15 years and the reasons for replacement were registered. Attention was also paid to patient drop-out and patients' variables such as gender, filling degree, type of tooth (premolar vs molar), type of restoration (MO or DO vs MOD), jaw (upper vs lower) and the patients' op...