IADR Abstract Archives
Assessment of restorative treatment in permanent teeth with amelogenesis Imperfecta
Objectives: The restoration of teeth with amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) is related to the age and collaboration of the patient, development of the dentition, type and severity of the defects. Their longevity and stability is limited. Objectives: 1) Estimate success rates at 24 months of different restorations used to rehabilitate permanent teeth with AI. 2) Compare the longevity of composite resins in different AI types
Methods: Observational and longitudinal study. 3 standardized operators (Kappa 0.91) assessed the restorations made in patients with diagnosis of AI who required dental attention at the Department of Pediatric Dentistry of FOUBA (2012-2018) and responded to the recitations at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Out of 234 restorations, 125 were composite resins (CR) made in anterior teeth and premolars, 60 glass-ionomer resin modified (GI) in anterior and posterior teeth and 49 metal crowns (MC) in first and second molars. They were carried out by students who are attending the last year of the course of studies and who have a teaching reference framework. Specially designed charts were used to record personal information, date and age at rehabilitation time, AI type (1, 2 and 3), affected teeth, restoration (CR, GI, MC) and retention thereof (1: full, 2: unadapted, 3: absent) at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Percentages with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. These percentages were compared using a mixed logistic regression model with the patient as a random factor. Significance level of 5%.
Results: The success rates of the restorations assessed at 24 months were: CR 36% (27.8, 45.1); GI 13.3% (6.3, 25.1); MC 89.8% (77.0, 96.2). Composite resin restorations in type 1, 2 and 3 AI showed a longevity at 24 months of 63.0% (48.7, 75.4), 18.2% (3.2, 52.2) y 15% (7.5, 27.1) respectively (p = 0.065).
Conclusions: In this study the metal crown showed the best clinical performance at 24 months. Hypomineralized and hypomaturative AI teeth have composite resin restorations with less longevity than those with hypoplastic AI.
Methods: Observational and longitudinal study. 3 standardized operators (Kappa 0.91) assessed the restorations made in patients with diagnosis of AI who required dental attention at the Department of Pediatric Dentistry of FOUBA (2012-2018) and responded to the recitations at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Out of 234 restorations, 125 were composite resins (CR) made in anterior teeth and premolars, 60 glass-ionomer resin modified (GI) in anterior and posterior teeth and 49 metal crowns (MC) in first and second molars. They were carried out by students who are attending the last year of the course of studies and who have a teaching reference framework. Specially designed charts were used to record personal information, date and age at rehabilitation time, AI type (1, 2 and 3), affected teeth, restoration (CR, GI, MC) and retention thereof (1: full, 2: unadapted, 3: absent) at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Percentages with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. These percentages were compared using a mixed logistic regression model with the patient as a random factor. Significance level of 5%.
Results: The success rates of the restorations assessed at 24 months were: CR 36% (27.8, 45.1); GI 13.3% (6.3, 25.1); MC 89.8% (77.0, 96.2). Composite resin restorations in type 1, 2 and 3 AI showed a longevity at 24 months of 63.0% (48.7, 75.4), 18.2% (3.2, 52.2) y 15% (7.5, 27.1) respectively (p = 0.065).
Conclusions: In this study the metal crown showed the best clinical performance at 24 months. Hypomineralized and hypomaturative AI teeth have composite resin restorations with less longevity than those with hypoplastic AI.