 |
Title |
The use of dental amalgam in a posterior dental restoration exhibits slight superiority in the overall success of the restoration when compared with resin bonded composites |
Clinical Question |
In a healthy adult patient in need of a posterior dental restoration in a stress bearing region, how does the use of dental amalgam versus bonded resin composite correlate with the overall success of that restoration? |
Clinical Bottom Line |
Dental amalgam exhibits a slight advantage in overall success when compared to a bonded resin composite in the posterior teeth, but the advantage is only very slight. (See Comments on the CAT below) |
Best Evidence |
(you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link) |
PubMed ID |
Author / Year |
Patient Group |
Study type
(level of evidence) |
#1) 11763918 | Hickel/2000 | Patients with restorations of permanent teeth | Meta analysis of longitudinal, controlled clinical studies and retrospective cross-sectional studies | Key results | Annual failure rates for resin bonded composites were 0-9%, while the rates for dental amalgam were 0-7%. The median failure rates were 1.1% for amalgam and 2.1% for resin-bonded composite. Both types were analyzed in posterior stress bearing cavities. “Main reasons for failure were secondary caries, marginal deficiencies, fracture, and wear.” | #2) 15058177 | Sachdeo/2004 | 133 patients with amalgam, composite, or open sandwich restorations | Randomized Controlled Trial | Key results | There was no statistically significant difference in wear at 1 year (p>0.05) between amalgam and composite. At 2 years, the amalgam restorations had significantly less wear than composite (p=0.033). Occlusal and proximal contacts in both groups of restorations were clinically satisfactory at 2 years. | |
Evidence Search |
"Dental Amalgam"[Mesh] AND "Composite Resins"[Mesh] AND ((Meta-Analysis[ptyp] OR Randomized Controlled Trial[ptyp]) AND English[lang]) |
Comments on
The Evidence |
Longer-term studies comparing amalgam and composite restorations beyond 2 years would provide additional valuable information when deciding between the two restorative materials. |
Applicability |
Any patient in need of amalgam or resin bonded composite on permanent teeth. |
Specialty/Discipline |
(General Dentistry) (Restorative Dentistry) |
Keywords |
amalgam, resin-bonded composite
|
ID# |
523 |
Date of submission: |
01/20/2010 |
E-mail |
kartaltepe@uthscsa.edu |
Author |
Christen Kartaltepe |
Co-author(s) |
William S. Longino |
Co-author(s) e-mail |
|
Faculty mentor/Co-author |
H. Ralph Rawls, PhD |
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail |
RAWLS@uthscsa.edu |
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?) |
post a rationale |
None available | |
 |
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS', FACULTY, RESIDENTS and/or STUDENTS COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs) |
post a comment |
by Salimah Shariff (San Antonio, TX) on 04/10/2012 I performed a PubMed search on this CAT in April of 2012, and found a more recent publication: PubMed: 17545266. This randomized controlled trial on 472 patients found the same results as published in this CAT, but adds further documentation. The patients were between 8 and 12 years old at the start of the study, but were followed for several years, so I think they can be considered adults, as applied to this CAT question. | |
 |
|