HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 129, No 5, 593-599. © 1998 American Dental Association

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by MCCOY, R. B. Articles by JOHNSON, G. H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by MCCOY, R. B. Articles by JOHNSON, G. H. Related Collections Restoratives

JADA Continuing Education

The authors describe a study in which they placed 126 Class V composite resin restorations without mechanical retention, divided into three groups of 42, in 23 patients. They followed the performance of the restorations over a three-year period. For all three groups, restorations were placed using All-Bond 2 dental adhesive and Z100 composite resin; A.R.T. Bond and Brilliant Dentin composite; and Prisma Universal Bond 3 and Variglass VLC polyacid-modified composite resin. The authors evaluated retention as well as color stability, wear resistance, sensitivity, sulcular depth, loss of attachment, bleeding on probing and crevicular fluid flow. Based on their results, the authors propose that restoration of Class V lesions without using mechanical retention could be expected to succeed in seven of 10 restorations over a three-year period using these restorative systems.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. De Munck, K. Van Landuyt, M. Peumans, A. Poitevin, P. Lambrechts, M. Braem, and B. Van Meerbeek A Critical Review of the Durability of Adhesion to Tooth Tissue: Methods and Results J. Dent. Res., February 1, 2005; 84(2): 118 - 132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]