Long term clinical performance of 'open sandwich' and 'total-etch' Class II composite resin restorations showing proximal deterioration of glass-ionomer cement.

OBJECTIVES

To compare clinical performance of resin composite posterior Class-II restorations placed with etch-and-rinse adhesive or open sandwich technique using glass-ionomer cement.

METHODS

Data on Class II restorations placed by one dentist between 1990 and 2016 were collected from patient files, including caries risk, tooth related variables, applied materials and dates of last check-up visit and restoration placement. Open sandwich restorations were placed before 2001, while after 2001, a total-etch technique using etch-and-rinse 3-step adhesive was used when placing a Class II composite restoration. For statistical analysis, Kaplan-Meier statistics and a multilevel Cox-Regression was conducted (p < 0.05). Annual Failures Rates (AFR) were calculated.

RESULTS

675 Class II restorations were placed in 91 patients, 491 total-etch restorations (observation time 2-18 y), and 184 open sandwich restorations (observation time 19-29 y) showing AFRs at 15 years as 2.9 % for total-etch and 9.7 % for open sandwich restorations. Secondary caries as failure was equally distributed among the 2 groups and 27 % of the failures in the open sandwich group were due to proximal deterioration of glass-ionomer cement. The Cox-regression showed a significant higher risk for failure for the open sandwich technique compared to total-etch class-II composite restorations (HR = 2.9; p < 0.001).

SIGNIFICANCE: Application of glass-ionomer cement using the open sandwich technique cannot be recommended for class-II restorations as being more complex and showing poorer clinical performance.