Biodegradation of Resin-Dentin Bonds: a Clinical Problem?

被引:0
作者
Carvalho R.M. [1 ]
Manso A.P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Oral Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Division of Biomaterials, The University of British Columbia, 368-2199 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, V6T 1Z3, BC
关键词
Clinical success; Degradation; Functional load; Marginal gap; Resin composite restorations; Secondary caries;
D O I
10.1007/s40496-016-0104-0
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Biodegradation of the resin-dentin interfaces has been a focus of research over the last decade. Most studies show that degradation of both the collagen and the adhesive take place within short periods of time after bonding, and claim that such loss of structure at the interface opens opportunity for secondary caries initiation and progression thus leading to failure of the restoration. Open margins are further compromised by thermo-mechanical loading and enzymes produced by local bacteria. While marginal gaps appear to be unavoidable, it is remarkable that resin composite restorations can deliver successful clinical service for many years provided preventive and conservative measures to reduce the caries-risk of the patient are applied along with the restorative treatment. This review will look into the evidence from laboratory studies that investigated degradation of bonds and the consequences leading to clinical failure and balance that against the results of clinical trials that evidence the factors associated with the durability and clinical success of resin composite restorations. © 2016, Springer International Publishing AG.
引用
收藏
页码:229 / 233
页数:4
相关论文
共 45 条
  • [1] Mjor I.A., The reasons for replacement and the age of failed restorations in general dental practice, Acta Odontol Scand, 55, pp. 58-63, (1997)
  • [2] Mjor I.A., Toffenetti F., Secondary caries: a literature review with case reports, Quintessence Int, 31, pp. 165-179, (2000)
  • [3] Bernardo M., Luis H., Martin M.D., Et al., Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial, J Am Dent Assoc, 138, pp. 775-783, (2007)
  • [4] Soncini J.A., Maserejian N.N., Trachtenberg F., Et al., 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 Assoc, 138, pp. 763-772, (2007)
  • [5] Tezvergil-Mutluay A., Pashley D.H., Mutluay M.M., Long-term durability of dental adhesives, Curr Oral Health Rep, 2, pp. 174-181, (2015)
  • [6] Cenci M.S., Pereira-Cenci T., Cury J.A., Et al., Relationship between gap size and dentine secondary caries formation assessed in a microcosm biofilm model, Caries Res, 43, pp. 97-102, (2009)
  • [7] Nassar H.M., Gonzalez-Cabezas C., Effect of gap geometry on secondary caries wall lesion development, Caries Res, 45, pp. 346-352, (2011)
  • [8] Kuper N.K., Opdam N.J.M., Ruben J.L., Et al., Gap size and wall lesion development next to composite, J Dent Res, 93, pp. 108S-113, (2014)
  • [9] What constitutes dental caries? Histopathology of carious enamel and dentin related to the action of cariogenic biofilms, J Dent Res, 83, Spec Iss C, pp. C35-CC8, (2004)
  • [10] Gaengler P., Hoyer I., Montag R., Et al., Micromorphological evaluation of posterior composite restorations: a 10 year report, J Oral Rehabil, 31, pp. 991-1000, (2004)