Survival and causes of failed amalgam restorations
Keywords:
Amalgam, Secondary caries, Longevity of amalgam restoration, Fracture of restorationAbstract
Objective: To determine the reasons for failure of amalgam restorations and evaluate the association between the reasons for failure of restorations with gender, classes of cavities, and teeth involved. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in the Operative Department of Dental Section of Bahria University Medical and Dental College Karachi, from June 2013 to February 2014.Patients were selected randomly who had presented with complaint in amalgam restoration. Specially designed proformas were used to get the information such as the name of the patient, age, gender, teeth in need for replacement of restorations, age of the restorations and the reasons for failed restorations. The criteria for failed amalgam restorations were secondary caries, improper proximal contact, fractured restoration and gingival irritation due to overhang. Chi-square test was applied to get the significance of the result. Results: A total of 141 patients with failed amalgam restorations were examined. The mean age was 40 (±16.18). In all 95 molar and 46 premolar teeth were observed. Secondary caries was leading reason for failure of amalgam restorations (44.68%), followed by gingival irritation due to overhang (17.02%), and margin fracture (12.05%). The mean of longevity of amalgam restoration was 5 years. Chi-square test showed significant association between causes of failure and duration of restorations, different classes of cavities (p-value <0.000) and insignificant relationship with gender (P-value < 0.67). Conclusion: Secondary caries was the most common cause of failure of amalgam restoration in Class II cavities.
References
Burke FJ, Wilson NH, Cheung SW, Mjor IA. Influence of patient factors on age of restorations at failure and reasons for their placement and replacement. J Dent 2001; 29:317-24.
Alomari Q, Al-Kanderi B, Qudeimat M, Omar R. Re-treatment decisions for failed posterior restorations among dentists in Kuwait. Eur J Dent 2010; 4:41-9.
Bernardo M, Martin MD, Leroux BG. Survival and reasons for failure of Amalgam versus Composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial. JADA 2007; 138:775-83.
Lucarotti PS, Holder RL, Burke FJ. Outcome of direct restorations placed within the general dental services in England and Wales (Part 1): variation by type of restoration and re-intervention. J Dent 2005; 33:805-15.
Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Cenci MS, Huysmans MC, Wilson NH. Age of failed restorations: A deceptive longevity parameter. J Dent 2011; 39:225-30.
Bamise OT, Oginni AO, Adedigba MA, Olagundoye OF. Perception of patients with Amalgam fillings about toxicity of mercury in Dental Amalgam. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice 2012; 13:289-93.
Tveit AB, Espelid I. Class II amalgam: interobserver variations in replacement decisions diagnosis of caries and crevices. Int Dent J 1992; 42:12-8.
Ferrance JL. Resin-based composite performance: Are there some things we can't predict?.Dent Mater 2013;29:51-8.
Soares AC, Cavalheiro A. A Review of Amalgam and Composite Longevity of Posterior Restorations. Rev Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac 2010; 51:155-64.
Olaleye AO. Placement and replacement of amalgam restoration in Nigeria- A cross sectional retrospective study. PODJ 2013; 33:151-5.
Braga SR, Vasconcelos BT, Macedo MR, Martins VR, Sobral MA. Reasons for placement and replacement of direct restorative materials in Brazil. Quintessence Int. 2007;38(4):189-94.
Simecek JW, Diefenderfer KE, Cohen ME. An evaluation of replacement rates for posterior resin- based composite and amalgam restorations in U.S. Navy and marine corps recruits. JADA 2009;140(2):200-9.
Qvist V, Thylstrup A, Mjör IA. Restorative treatment pattern and longevity of amalgam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand, 1986a; 44(6): 343-9.
Qvist J, Qvist V, Mjör IA. Placement and longevity of amalgam restorations in Denmark. Acta Odontol Scand 1990;48:297-303.
MacInnis WA, Ismail A, Brogan H. Placement and replacement of restorations in a military population. J Can Dent Assoc 1991;57:227-31.
Burke FJT, Cheung SW, Mjör IA, Wilson NH. Restoration longevity and analysis of reasons for the placement and replacement of restorations provided by vocational dental practitioners and their trainers in the United Kingdom. Quintessence Int 1999;30:234-42.
Van Dyke B. No more amalgams! [Letter.] Dent Econ 1999;89(7):18.
Dickerson WG. Integrating cosmetic dentistry into a busy practice. Dent Econ 1997;87:30-6.
Boston DW, Cotmore JM, Sperrazza L. Caries diagnosis with dye-staining at amalgam restoration margins. Am J Dent 1995;8:280-2.
Kidd EAM, Toffenetti F, Mjör IA. Secondary caries. Int Dent J 1992; 42:127-38.
Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BA. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations. Dent Mater 2007;23:2-8.
Tyas MJ. Placement and replacement of restorations by selected practitioners. Aust Dent J 2005;50:81-9.
Forss H, Widström E. Reasons for restorative therapy and the longevity of restorations in adults. Acta Odontol Scand 2004;62(2): 82-6.
Jokstad A, Mjör IA. Analyses of long-term clinical behavior of class II amalgam restorations. Acta Odontol Scand 1991; 49: 47-63.
Bernardo M, Luis H, Martin MD, Leroux BG, Rue T, Leitão J, et al. Survival and reasons for failure of amalgam versus composite posterior restorations placed in a randomized clinical trial. JADA 2007;138(6):775-83.
Mjör IA. Clinical diagnosis of recurrent caries. JADA 2005; 136: 1426-33.
Van Dijken JW, Sunnegardh-Gronberg K.A four-year clinical evaluation of a highly filled hybrid resin composite in posterior cavities. J Adhes Dent 2005;7:343-9.
Hansen EK, Asmussen E. In vivo fractures of endodontically treated posterior teeth restored with enamel-bonded resin. Endod Dent Traumatol 1990;6:218-25.
Norman RD, Wright JS, Rydberg RJ, Felkner LL.A 5-year study comparing a posterior composite resin and an amalgam. J Prosthet Dent 1990;64:523-9.
Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: Not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater 2012;28:87-101.
Soncini JA, Maserejian NN, Trachtenberg F, Tavares M, Hayes C. The longevity of amalgam versus compomer/composite restorations in posterior primary and permanent teeth: findings from the New England Children's Amalgam Trial. JADA 2007;138:763-72
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Shama Asghar, Farheen Fatima
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Journal of Bahria University Medical & Dental College is an open access journal and is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0. which permits unrestricted non commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 
