Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Jan-Mar;10(1):16-22.
doi: 10.4103/1305-7456.175692.

A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite

Hande Kemaloglu  1 , Tijen Pamir  1 , Huseyin Tezel  1
Affiliations

A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite

Hande Kemaloglu et al. Eur J Dent. 2016 Jan-Mar.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the performance and postoperative sensitivity of a posterior resin composite with that of bonded amalgam in 40 (n = 20) large sized cavities and to evaluate whether resin composite could be an alternative for bonded amalgam.

Materials and methods: This was a randomized clinical trial. Twenty patients in need of at least two posterior restorations were recruited. Authors randomly assigned one half of the restorations to receive bonded amalgam and the other half to composite restorations. Forty bonded amalgams (n = 20) and composites (n = 20) were evaluated for their performance on modified-US Public Health Service criteria and postoperative sensitivity using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 36-months.

Results: Success rate of this study was 100%. First clinical alterations were rated as Bravo after 1 year in marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, and surface roughness for both amalgam and composite. At the 3(rd) year, overall "Bravo" rated restorations were 12 for bonded amalgam and 13 for resin composites. There were no significant differences among the VAS scores of composites and bonded amalgams for all periods (P > 0.05) except for the comparisons at the 3(rd) year evaluation (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, both resin composite and bonded amalgam were clinically acceptable. Postoperative sensitivity results tend to decrease more in composite restorations rather than amalgams. Therefore, it was concluded that posterior resin composite can be used even in large sized cavities.

Keywords: Bonded amalgam; posterior restoration; postoperative sensitivity; resin composite.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The large sized cavities of this study
Figure 2
Figure 2
A resin composite restoration scored with Alpha in all evaluation criteria: At baseline (a) and at the end of the third year (b)
Figure 3
Figure 3
At the end of 3 years, marginal discoloration around the restoration and chipping of the material at palatal area were observed in resin composite of the second premolar. At amalgam restoration besides, failures of anatomical form and surface texture were detected
Figure 4
Figure 4
Marginal fracture with no exposed base and dentin in amalgam was rated with Bravo score
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Brunthaler A, König F, Lucas T, Sperr W, Schedle A. Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig. 2003;7:63–70. - PubMed
    1. Manhart J, Neuerer P, Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, Hickel R. Three-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84:289–96. - PubMed
    1. Statement on posterior resin-based composites. ADA Council on Scientific Affairs; ADA Council on Dental Benefit Programs. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998;129:1627–8. - PubMed
    1. UNEP Dental Amalgam Phase. Down Project East Africa Dental Amalgam Phase. Down (EADAP) Project Promoting the ‘Phase Down’ Approach of Dental Amalgam in Developing Countries. [Last accessed on 2015 Dec 30]. Available from: http://www.fdiworldental.org/fdi-at-work/programme-for-africa/unep-denta... .
    1. Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Loomans BA, Huysmans MC. 12-year survival of composite vs.amalgam restorations. J Dent Res. 2010;89:1063–7. - PubMed