Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2016; 10(04): 522-528
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.195177
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced composite crowns in pulp-treated primary molars: 12-month results

Zahra Mohammadzadeh
1   Dental Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
,
Iman Parisay
2   Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
,
Maryam Mehrabkhani
3   Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
,
Azam Sadat Madani
1   Dental Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
,
Fatemeh Mazhari
2   Dental Material Research Center, Faculty of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
24 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical performance of tooth-colored fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) crowns in pulp-treated second primary mandibular teeth. Materials and Methods: This split-mouth randomized, clinical trial performed on 67 children between 3 and 6 years with two primary mandibular second molars requiring pulp treatment. After pulp therapy, the teeth were randomly assigned to stainless steel crown (SSC) or FRC crown groups. Modified United States Public Health Service criteria were used to evaluate marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, and secondary caries in FRC crowns at intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months. Retention rate and gingival health were also compared between the two groups. The data were analyzed using Friedman, Cochran, and McNemar's tests at a significance level of 0.05. Results: Intact marginal integrity in FRC crowns at 3, 6, and 12 months were 93.2%, 94.8%, and 94.2%, respectively. Marginal discoloration and secondary caries were not found at any of the FRC crowns. The retention rates of the FRC crowns were 100%, 98.3%, and 89.7% at 3, 6 and 12 months, respectively, whereas all the SSCs were found to be present and intact after 12 months (P = 0.016). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in gingival health. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, it seems that when esthetics is a concern, in cooperative patients with good oral hygiene, FRC crowns can be considered as a valuable procedure.

Key words:

Fiber-reinforced composite crowns - pulp-treated primary teeth - stainless steel crowns - United States Public Health Service criteria
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Dean J, Avery D, McDonald R. Dentistry for the Child and Adolescennt. 9th ed.. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2011: p. 177-204
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Roberson T, Heymann H, Swift E, Sturdevant C. Sturdevants Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed.. United States: Scherfer; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Hosoya Y, Omachi K, Staninec M. Colorimetric values of esthetic stainless steel crowns. Quintessence Int 2002; 33: 537-41
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry. Clinical Affairs Committee – Restorative Dentistry Subcommittee. Guideline on pediatric restorative dentistry. Pediatr Dent 2012; 34: 173-80
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kilpatrick NM. Durability of restorations in primary molars. J Dent 1993; 21: 67-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ram D, Fuks AB, Eidelman E. Long-term clinical performance of esthetic primary molar crowns. Pediatr Dent 2003; 25: 582-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Guelmann M, Bookmyer KL, Villalta P, García-Godoy F. Microleakage of restorative techniques for pulpotomized primary molars. J Dent Child (Chic) 2004; 71: 209-11
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Shinya A, Lassila LV, Vallittu PK. The effect of preparation design on the marginal stress of resin-bonded metal-free crowns: A finite element study. Int J Prosthodont 2008; 21: 445-7
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Donly KJ, Ellis RK. Glass inserts. A new dimension in restorative dentistry. Am J Dent 1989; 2: 21-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ram D, Peretz B. Composite crown-form crowns for severely decayed primary molars: A technique for restoring function and esthetics. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2000; 24: 257-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Dyer SR, Lassila LV, Jokinen M, Vallittu PK. Effect of fiber position and orientation on fracture load of fiber-reinforced composite. Dent Mater 2004; 20: 947-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sadowsky SJ. An overview of treatment considerations for esthetic restorations: A review of the literature. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 96: 433-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Pinkham JR, Casamassimo PS, McTigue DJ, Fields HW, Nowak AJ. Pediatric Dentistry: Infancy Through Adolescence. 4th ed.. St. Louis: Elsevier Saunders; 2005: p. 325-40
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Garoushi SK, Lassila LV, Tezvergil A, Vallittu PK. Fiber-reinforced composite substructure: Load-bearing capacity of an onlay restoration and flexural properties of the material. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006; 7: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Freilich M, Meiers J, Duncan J, Goldberg A. Fiber-reinforced Composites in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Garoushi S, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Fracture resistance of short, randomly oriented, glass fiber-reinforced composite premolar crowns. Acta Biomater 2007; 3: 779-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Atieh M. Stainless steel crown versus modified open-sandwich restorations for primary molars: A 2-year randomized clinical trial. Int J Paediatr Dent 2008; 18: 325-32
    Google Scholar
  • 18 van Dijken JW, Hasselrot L, Ormin A, Olofsson AL. Restorations with extensive dentin/enamel-bonded ceramic coverage. A 5-year follow-up. Eur J Oral Sci 2001; 109: 222-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Arhun N, Arman A. Fiber-reinforced technology in multidisciplinary chairside approaches. Indian J Dent Res 2008; 19: 272-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Cho L, Song H, Koak J, Heo S. Marginal accuracy and fracture strength of ceromer/fiber-reinforced composite crowns: Effect of variations in preparation design. J Prosthet Dent 2002; 88: 388-95
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Cho L, Choi J, Yi YJ, Park CJ. Effect of finish line variants on marginal accuracy and fracture strength of ceramic optimized polymer/fiber-reinforced composite crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91: 554-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Behr M, Rosentritt M, Mangelkramer M, Handel G. The influence of different cements on the fracture resistance and marginal adaptation of all-ceramic and fiber-reinforced crowns. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 538-42
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gaengler P, Hoyer I, Montag R. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations: The 10-year report. J Adhes Dent 2001; 3: 185-94
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Shiono H, Koizumi H, Hirata M, Ayano M, Nakayama D, Matsumura H. Seven-year clinical evaluation of indirect restorations made of the Estenia composite. Int Chin J Dent 2009; 9: 39-43
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Burke FJ, Crisp RJ, James A, Mackenzie L, Pal A, Sands P. et al. Two year clinical evaluation of a low-shrink resin composite material in UK general dental practices. Dent Mater 2011; 2: 622-30
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Monaco C, Ferrari M, Miceli GP, Scotti R. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced composite inlay FPDs. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16: 319-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ayna B, Celenk S, Atakul F, Uysal E. Three-year clinical evaluation of endodontically treated anterior teeth restored with a polyethylene fibre-reinforced composite. Aust Dent J 2009; 54: 136-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Can SayE, Kayahan B, Ozel E, Gokce K, Soyman M, Bayirli G. Clinical evaluation of posterior composite restorations in endodontically treated teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006; 7: 17-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Zortuk M, Kilic K, Uzun G, Ozturk A, Kesim B. The effect of different fiber concentrations on the surface roughness of provisional crown and fixed partial denture resin. Eur J Dent 2008; 2: 185-90
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, Lauris JR, Navarro MF, de Carvalho RM. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: One-year results. J Contemp Dent Pract 2010; 11: 025-32
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Prati C, Chersoni S, Cretti L, Montanari G. Retention and marginal adaptation of a compomer placed in non-stress-bearing areas used with the total-etch technique: A 3-year retrospective study. Clin Oral Investig 1998; 2: 168-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. Clinical evaluation of direct cuspal coverage with posterior composite resin restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2006; 18: 256-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Santiago SL, Passos VF, Vieira AH, Navarro MF, Lauris JR, Franco EB. Two-year clinical evaluation of resinous restorative systems in non-carious cervical lesions. Braz Dent J 2010; 21: 229-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Guelmann M, Matsson L, Bimstein E. Periodontal health at first permanent molars adjacent to primary molar stainless steel crowns. J Clin Periodontol 1988; 15: 531-3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Sharaf AA, Farsi NM. A clinical and radiographic evaluation of stainless steel crowns for primary molars. J Dent 2004; 32: 27-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Einwag J. Effect of entirely preformed stainless steel crowns on periodontal health in primary, mixed dentitions. ASDC J Dent Child 1984; 51: 356-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Chao DD, Tsai TP, Chen TC. Clinical evaluation of gingival tissue restored with stainless steel crown. Changgeng Yi Xue Za Zhi 1992; 15: 198-203
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Durr DP, Ashrafi MH, Duncan WK. A study of plaque accumulation and gingival health surrounding stainless steel crowns. ASDC J Dent Child 1982; 49: 343-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Al-Samhan A, Al-Enezi H, Alomari Q. Clinical evaluation of posterior resin composite restorations placed by dental students of Kuwait University. Med Princ Pract 2010; 19: 299-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Pavan S, dos Santos PH, Berger S, Bedran-Russo AK. The effect of dentin pretreatment on the microtensile bond strength of self-adhesive resin cements. J Prosthet Dent 2010; 104: 258-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Lehmann F, Eickemeyer G, Rammelsberg P. Fracture resistance of metal-free composite crowns-effects of fiber reinforcement, thermal cycling, and cementation technique. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 92: 258-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Attari N, Roberts JF. Restoration of primary teeth with crowns: A systematic review of the literature. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent 2006; 7: 58-62
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Guelmann M, Fair J, Bimstein E. Permanent versus temporary restorations after emergency pulpotomies in primary molars. Pediatr Dent 2005; 27: 478-81
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Kirzioglu Z, Gungor OE, Ciftci ZZ. Evaluation of the restoration success of endodontic therapy of the primary molars. Eur J Dent 2011; 5: 415-22
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar