References

Mackenzie L, Banerjee A. Minimally invasive direct restorations: a practical guide. Br Dent J. 2017; 223:163-171
Minimata Convention on Mercury. 2013.
van Dijken JW, Hörstedt P. Effect of the use of rubber dam versus cotton rolls on marginal adaptation of composite resin fillings to acid-etched enamel. Acta Odontol Scand. 1987; 45:303-308
Mackenzie L, Shortall AC, Burke FJT. Direct posterior composites: a practical guide. Dent Update. 2009; 36:71-80
van de Sande FH, Rodolpho PA, Basso GR, Patias R 18-year survival of posterior composite resin restorations with and without glass ionomer cement as base. Dent Mater. 2015; 31:669-675
Bohaty BS, Ye Q, Misra A, Sene F, Spencer P. Posterior composite restoration update: focus on factors influencing form and function. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2013; 5:33-42
Gilmour AS, Latif M, Addy LD, Lynch CD. Placement of posterior composite restorations in United Kingdom dental practices: techniques, problems, and attitudes. Int Dent J. 2009; 59:148-154
Wilson NH, Lynch CD. The teaching of posterior resin composites: planning for the future based on 25 years of research. J Dent. 2014; 42:503-516
Mackenzie L, Banerjee A. The minimally invasive management of early occlusal caries: a practical guide. Prim Dent J. 2014; 3:34-41
Laegreid T, Gjerdet NR, Johansson A, Johansson AK. Clinical decision making on extensive molar restorations. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:231-240
Opdam N, Skupien JA, Kreulen CM, Roeters J, Loomans B, Huysmans MD. Case report: a predictable technique to establish occlusal contact in extensive direct composite resin restorations: the DSO-technique. Oper Dent. 2016; 41:(S7)96-108
Blum IR, Younis N, Wilson NH. Use of lining materials under posterior resin composite restorations in the UK. J Dent. 2017; 57:66-72
Burke FJT. From extension for prevention to prevention of extension: (minimal intervention dentistry). Dent Update. 2003; 30:492-502
Ferracane JL. Resin composite – state of the art. Dent Mater. 2011; 27:29-38
Green D, Mackenzie L, Banerjee A. Minimally invasive long-term management of direct restorations: the ‘5 Rs’. Dent Update. 2015; 42:413-426
Banerjee1 A. Minimal intervention dentistry: part 7. Minimally invasive operative caries management: rationale and techniques. Br Dent J. 2013; 214:107-111
de la Peña VA, García RP, García RP. Sectional matrix: step-by-step directions for their clinical use. Br Dent J. 2016; 220:11-14
Ericson D. The concept of minimally invasive dentistry. Dent Update. 2007; 34:9-18
Kidd EA. How ‘clean’ must a cavity be before restoration?. Caries Res. 2004; 38:305-313
Bonsor S. Contemporary strategies and materials to protect the dental pulp. Dent Update. 2017; 44:731-741
Costa T, Rezende M, Sakamoto A, Bittencourt B Influence of adhesive type and placement technique on postoperative sensitivity in posterior composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2017; 42:143-154
Ferracane JL. Buonocore Lecture. Placing dental composites – a stressful experience. Oper Dent. 2008; 33:247-257
Sauro S, Pashley DH. Strategies to stabilise dentine-bonded interfaces through remineralising operative approaches – state-of-the-art. Int J Adhes Adhes. 2016; 69:39-57
Burke FJT, Lawson A, Green DJB, Mackenzie L. What's new in dentine bonding?: universal adhesives. Dent Update. 2017; 44:328-340
Tjäderhane L. Dentin bonding: can we make it last?. Oper Dent. 2015; 40:4-18
Overton JD, Sullivan DJ. Early failure of Class II resin composite versus Class II amalgam restorations placed by dental students. J Dent Educ. 2012; 76:338-340
Sarrett DC. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005; 21:9-20
Jung JH, Park SH. Comparison of polymerization shrinkage, physical properties, and marginal adaptation of flowable and restorative bulk fill resin-based composites. Oper Dent. 2017; 42:375-386
Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, Nixon P. Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review. Br Dent J. 222:337-344
Price RB, Shortall AC, Palin WM. Contemporary issues in light curing. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:4-14
Shortall AC, Price RB, MacKenzie L, Burke FJT. Guidelines for the selection, use, and maintenance of LED light-curing units – Part II. Br Dent J. 2016; 221:551-554
Mackenzie L. Tooth anatomy: a practical guide Part 1: drawing posterior teeth. Dent Update. 2017; 44:697-712
Featherstone JD, Doméjean S. Minimal intervention dentistry: part 1. From ‘compulsive’ restorative dentistry to rational therapeutic strategies. Br Dent J. 2012; 213:441-445
Sharif MO, Caleugh M, Merry A, Tickle M, Dunne SM, Brunton P Replacement versus repair of defective restorations in adults: resin composite. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; (2)

Posterior composites: An update

From Volume 46, Issue 4, April 2019 | Pages 323-343

Authors

Louis Mackenzie

BDS, FDS RCPS FCGDent, Head Dental Officer, Denplan UK, Andover

General Dental Practitioner, Birmingham; Clinical Lecturer, University of Birmingham School of Dentistry, Birmingham, UK.

Articles by Louis Mackenzie

Adrian Shortall

University of Birmingham School of Dentistry

Articles by Adrian Shortall

Dipesh Parmar

University of Birmingham School of Dentistry, St Chad's Queensway, Birmingham B4 6NN, UK

Articles by Dipesh Parmar

Abstract

The restoration of damaged posterior teeth using direct composite materials is an integral component of contemporary dental practice. Resin-based materials are now routinely used to solve a wide range of restorative problems from the minimally invasive management of early carious lesions to the total restoration of severely worn dentitions.

As there is a wide variation in the teaching and practice of posterior composite techniques worldwide, this paper aims to provide an evidence-based update designed to help clinical teams equip practices with suitable materials and equipment and optimize all clinical stages of posterior composite procedures.

CPD/Clinical Relevance: Knowledge, understanding and advanced practical skill in posterior composite restorations is an essential requirement for contemporary clinical dentistry.

Article

Although amalgam has served dentistry well for over 150 years, its use is declining due to patient and professional demand for tooth-coloured alternatives, which are generally less sacrificial of tooth tissue,1 and as a result of an international environmental treaty aimed at phasing down the use of mercury-containing products.2

The use of resin composites for the restoration of posterior teeth has been an accepted technique since the 1970s.3 It is now a routine procedure in dentistry,4,5 with 100s of millions of posterior composite restorations being performed annually.6

Over the last ten years, encouraging long-term outcomes have resulted in a significant improvement in the reputation of posterior composites7 and, when appropriately carried out, they may be considered to be the optimal method of restoring posterior teeth.8

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Up to 2 free articles per month
  • New content available