|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Radiographic Secondary Caries Prevalence in Teeth with Clinically Defective Restorations
E.R. Hewlett
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.
REFERENCES
- ADA Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, and Equipment (1989). Recommendations in radiographic practices: an update, 1988. J Am Dent Assoc 118:115-117.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Boyd MA, Richardson AS (1985). Frequency of amalgam replacement in general dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 51:763-766.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Breslow L., Day NE (1980). Statistical methods in cancer research. Vol. 1. The analysis of case control studies. Lyon (France): International Agency for Research on Cancer.
- Dahl JE, Eriksen HM (1978). Reasons for replacement of amalgam dental restorations. Scand J Dent Res 86:404-407.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Espelid I., Tveit AB (1991). Diagnosis of secondary caries and crevices adjacent to amalgam. Int Dent J 41:359-364.[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Food & Drug Administration (1987). The selection of patients for x-ray examinations: Dental radiographic examinations. HHS Publication (FDA) No. 88-8273.
- Kelsey WP, Franco SJ, Blankenau RJ, Cavel WT, Barkmeier WW (1981). Caries as a cause of restoration replacement: a clinical survey. Quint Int 9(September):971-974.
- Kidd Eam, O'Hara JW (1990). The caries status of occlusal amalgam restorations with marginal defects. J Dent Res 69:1275-1277.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Letzel H., van't Hof MA, Vrijhoef Mma, Marshall, GW, Marshall SJ (1989). Failure, survival, and reasons for replacement of amalgam restorations. In: Anusavice, KJ, editor. Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago (IL): Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc., 83-92.
- Mjor I. ( 1981). Placement and replacement of restorations. Oper Dent 6:49-54.
- Qvist V., Thylstrup A., Mjor I. ( 1986). Restorative treatment pattern and longevity of amalgam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand 44:343-349.[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
- Soderholm K-J., Antonson DE, Fischlschweiger W. (1989). Correlation between marginal discrepancies at the amalgam/tooth interface and recurrent caries. In: Anusavice KJ, editor. Quality evaluation of dental restorations. Chicago (IL): Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc., 95-108.
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]
|
|
|
|
|
