This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hewlett, E.R. Articles by Flack, V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hewlett, E.R. Articles by Flack, V. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Radiographic Secondary Caries Prevalence in Teeth with Clinically Defective Restorations

UCLA School of Dentistry, 23-074 CHS, Los Angeles, California 90024-1668

K.A. Atchison

UCLA School of Dentistry, 23-074 CHS, Los Angeles, California 90024-1668

S.C. White

UCLA School of Dentistry, 23-074 CHS, Los Angeles, California 90024-1668

V. Flack

UCLA School of Public Health

Decisions to replace existing restorations are often based on clinical findings of margin discrepancies and other restoration defects. Previous studies have suggested that such findings do not correlate well with the actual presence of secondary caries, and that treatment should be deferred until caries is clinically or radiographically evident. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency with which clinically defective restorations are associated with radiographic secondary caries. As part of a study to assess the efficacy of guidelines for the ordering of dental radiographs, 6285 restored teeth in 490 subjects were examined clinically and radiographically by three calibrated investigators. Specific criteria were used to determine whether restorations were intact or defective. Of the total, 822 teeth (13%) were judged to have clinically defective restorations. Of these, 113 teeth (14%) had radiographic secondary caries. Of the 5463 teeth with intact restorations, 5% had radiographic secondary caries. We found that the likelihood of radiographic secondary caries was nearly three-fold higher for defective restorations than for intact restorations. The large percentage (86%) of defective restorations with no radiographic secondary caries suggests, however, that replacement of all defective restorations due to risk of secondary caries may constitute overtreatment. The use of defective restoration status and presence of radiographic secondary caries as a combined criterion for replacement may potentially reduce such overtreatment. The prevalence of secondary caries under defective restorations should be determined clinically so that the usefulness of combining the criteria of defective restoration with those of radiographic secondary caries can be evaluated.

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 72, No. 12, 1604-1608 (1993)
DOI: 10.1177/00220345930720121301


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Ozer and A. Thylstrup What is Known About Caries in Relation to Restorations as a Reason for Replacement? a Review Advances in Dental Research, December 1, 1995; 9(4): 394 - 402. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K.A. Atchison, S.C. White, V.F. Flack, E.R. Hewlett, and S.A. Kinder Efficacy of the FDA Selection Criteria for Radiographic Assessment of the Periodontium Journal of Dental Research, July 1, 1995; 74(7): 1424 - 1432. [Abstract] [PDF]