Clinical evaluation of composite restorations based on oral hygiene
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11603/2311-9624.2017.2.7963Keywords:
restoration, functioning, filling, chewing group of teeth, oral hygiene, physical properties of restorations.Abstract
The article describes the clinical effectiveness of restorations performed by composite materials for the restoration of hard tissues of teeth. Evaluated the status of restorations in children with different levels of oral hygiene. Influence of hygiene on the state of seals in 3,6,12 months.
The aim of the study. Clinically assess the quality of restorations of chewing teeth made of composite materials with regard to oral hygiene.
Material and methods of investigation. A total of 92 children aged 12-17 years were examined in whom 128 teeth with Cari I defects in Black were reconstructed with composite materials. To repair the defects, composite materials Charisma, Dipol and Esta-3 light curing were used.
Results of the study and their discussion. In children with poor oral hygiene, the quality of the seals is deteriorated for all materials compared to children with good and satisfactory oral hygiene. Especially the number of teeth with violation of marginal adaptation, discrepancy of color, discomfort and marginal pigmentation increases. It should be noted that the disruption of the anatomical form of the restorations (6.9%), the appearance of roughness (8.6%), color disturbance (10.6%) and the appearance of pigmentation (17.7%) were detected more often in caries defects, Dipol. With poor oral hygiene, the violation of the anatomical structure of the restorations from the Charisma composite (2.3%) and the Esta-3 material (5.9%) is more often compared with children with good and satisfactory oral hygiene.
Conclusions: Thus, the evaluation of the quality of restorations of the chewing group of teeth with composite materials showed that the level of oral hygiene significantly affects the quality of the fillings.
References
Ivanova, G.G. (2009). Problema kraevogo prilagania plomb i vozmozhnosti ego resheniya v stomatologicheskoy klinike [The problem of the boundary attachment of seals and the possibility of solving it in a dental clinic]. Klinicheskaya stomatologiya – Clinical Dentistry, (1),63-64 [in Russian].
Nikolaev, A.I., & Lobovkina, L.A. (2008). Unifikatsiya tekhniki preparirovaniya polostey i obrobotki restavratsyy pri vostanovlenii zubov kompozitami [Unification of the technique of cavity preparation and treatment of restorations during restoration of teeth by composites]. Novoe v stomatologii – New in Stomatology, (2), 39-41[in Russian].
Udod, A.A. (2001). Otsenka kachestva restavratsionnykh robot v zavisimosti ot urovnya gigieny polosti rta [Assessment of the quality of restoration work, depending on the level of oral hygiene]. Sovremennaya stomatologia – Modern Stomatology, (3), 70-71 [in Russian].
Elistratova, M. (1998). Kraevaya pronitsaemost plomb iz razlichnykh plombirovochnykh materialov v rannie sroki lecheniya [Marginal permeability of seals from various filling materials in the early treatment periods]. Stomatologia – Stomatology, (1), 16-18 [in Russian].
Gorgelad, A.A. (2010). Sravnitelnye rezultaty plombirovanie svetlootverzhdaemye compositami pri lechenii bolezney tverdykh tkaney zubov [Comparative results of sealing by light-curing composites in the treatment of diseases of hard tissues of teeth]. Stomatologicheskiy zhurnal – Stomatological Journal, 11 (2), 129-134 [in Russian].
Ryge, G. (1980). Clinical Criteria. Int Dent., 30, 347-358.
Hickel, R., Roulet, J., & Bayne, S. (2007). Recommendations for conducting controlled clinical studies of dental restorative materials. Int. Dent. J., 57, 300-302.
Devoto, W., Monaldo, S., & Jordi M. (2010). Composite in everyday practice: how to choose the right material and simplify application techniques in the anterior teeth. Eur. J. of Esthetic Dentistry, (1), 102-125.
Memarpour, M., & Fereshteh S., (2013). Restoration of primary anterior teeth using intracanal polyethylene fibersand composite: AnIn Vivo Study. The J. of Adhesive Dentistry, 15 (1), 85-91.
