Cureus · 2025
Clinical Evaluation of Composite Restorations Using the Fédération Dentaire Internationale (FDI) Criteria: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study at University Dental Hospital, The University of Lahore, Pakistan.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Naz Fariha, Anwar Malik Adeel, Qasim Muhammad, Shetty Bavabeedu Shashit, Ullah Khateeb Shafait, Abdelfattah Khalil Ashraf, Inam Sadaf, Nafees Syeda Sehar, Sammar Rehma
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Dental restorations play a very important role in maintaining oral function and aesthetics. However, the restoration's longevity is influenced by various factors, including material properties, classification of cavities, and clinical performance over time. Understanding why the restorations fail is essential not only for better treatment results but also for improving their longevity. The Fédération Dentaire Internationale (FDI) criteria provide a detailed framework for assessing restoration performance in functional, biological, and aesthetic aspects.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate clinical success and failure rates using FDI criteria for dental restorations based on tooth location, cavity type, and restoration duration.
METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional clinical evaluation was conducted on 230 restored teeth in patients treated with permanent composite restoration. Restorations were grouped by location (anterior or posterior), duration (≤6 months, >6-12 months, >1-3 years, >3-5 years, >5 years), and cavity classification (Classes I-V). Functional (fracture of material and retention, marginal adaptation, proximal contact point), biological (caries at restoration margin, dental hard tissue defects, post-operative sensitivity), and aesthetic (surface luster and texture, color match, marginal staining) parameters were evaluated. A statistical analysis was conducted using Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS, version 25; IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY) to determine significant differences.
RESULTS: The overall success rate was 30% (n=69), while 70% (n=161) experienced failure. Success rates were comparable between anterior (29.2%, n=14) and posterior teeth (30.2%, n=55). Class I restorations had the highest success rate (42.4%, n=36), whereas Class V restorations showed the lowest (11.1%, n=1), with a statistically significant association between cavity classification and restoration longevity (p=0.012). Restoration success declined over time, with those exceeding five years showing the highest failure rate (81.5%, n=22). Functional evaluation showed a decline in fracture resistance and marginal adaptation over time, while biological assessment revealed an increase in secondary caries. Aesthetic factors, including color match and marginal staining, also worsened with time.
CONCLUSION: Restoration longevity is influenced by cavity classification and duration of the restoration, with Class I restorations exhibiting superior durability. The findings emphasize the progressive decline in functional, biological, and aesthetic properties over time, stressing the need for improved restorative materials and techniques to enhance long-term success.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate clinical success and failure rates using FDI criteria for dental restorations based on tooth location, cavity type, and restoration duration.
METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional clinical evaluation was conducted on 230 restored teeth in patients treated with permanent composite restoration. Restorations were grouped by location (anterior or posterior), duration (≤6 months, >6-12 months, >1-3 years, >3-5 years, >5 years), and cavity classification (Classes I-V). Functional (fracture of material and retention, marginal adaptation, proximal contact point), biological (caries at restoration margin, dental hard tissue defects, post-operative sensitivity), and aesthetic (surface luster and texture, color match, marginal staining) parameters were evaluated. A statistical analysis was conducted using Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS, version 25; IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Armonk, NY) to determine significant differences.
RESULTS: The overall success rate was 30% (n=69), while 70% (n=161) experienced failure. Success rates were comparable between anterior (29.2%, n=14) and posterior teeth (30.2%, n=55). Class I restorations had the highest success rate (42.4%, n=36), whereas Class V restorations showed the lowest (11.1%, n=1), with a statistically significant association between cavity classification and restoration longevity (p=0.012). Restoration success declined over time, with those exceeding five years showing the highest failure rate (81.5%, n=22). Functional evaluation showed a decline in fracture resistance and marginal adaptation over time, while biological assessment revealed an increase in secondary caries. Aesthetic factors, including color match and marginal staining, also worsened with time.
CONCLUSION: Restoration longevity is influenced by cavity classification and duration of the restoration, with Class I restorations exhibiting superior durability. The findings emphasize the progressive decline in functional, biological, and aesthetic properties over time, stressing the need for improved restorative materials and techniques to enhance long-term success.