Restoration Survival: Revisiting Patients' Risk Factors Through a Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

A literature review was conducted to investigate the influence of patient-related factors on restoration survival in posterior permanent teeth as well as to report the methods used to collect these factors. The selection of articles on longitudinal clinical studies investigating the survival of posterior restorations (except full crowns and temporary fillings) and including patient-related factors was performed by applying predefined criteria. The review was organized into two parts, the first describing how patient factors were assessed in the studies (n=45) and the second presenting the statistical significance (n=27) and size of the effect (n=11) of these factors on restoration survival. Patient-related factors mentioned in the studies included age; gender; caries risk; caries activity/severity; decayed, missing, filled teeth; number of restorations; oral hygiene; and bruxism, among others. Sixteen studies included the patient age or age range in the analysis, which was found to be significant in 47% of the studies. Regarding gender, four of 17 reports found a significant effect on survival, showing more failures for men in three studies. The caries risk profile or related variables were included in the analysis of 15 studies, and a significant effect on survival was reported for high-caries-risk individuals (or related variables) in 67% of these studies. Bruxism was also found to influence restoration survival in three of six studies where this variable was investigated. Some issues were found regarding the reporting of methods used to classify patients according to risk and were thoroughly discussed. In view of the information gathered in this review, the assessment of patient factors along with other variables should become part of clinical studies investigating restoration survival, since several of these factors were shown to influence the failure of restorations, regardless of the material type.

Should my composite restorations last forever? Why are they failing?

“…Since the current restorative composites seem not to be the problem anymore 5 , more recent literature indicates that other factors have a predominant effect on the clinical performance of composite restorations. 12 These may include factors related to the patient (age, caries and occlusal stress risk, socioeconomic status) and the professional (age, gender, clinical experience). Establishing risk factors and indicating their main reasons might facilitate dentists' restorative treatment decisions, and consequently increase restorative longevity and reduce costs.…”

Association of masticatory muscle activity with sleep arousal and other concomitant movements during sleep

“…[1][2][3] Currently, several therapeutic approaches have been applied to reduce the frequency and/or intensity of SB. [1][2][3] Currently, several therapeutic approaches have been applied to reduce the frequency and/or intensity of SB.…”

Survival and Associated Risk Factors of Selective Caries Removal Treatments in Primary Teeth: A Retrospective Study in a High Caries Risk Population

“…Studies have already shown that "older" children Metz et al, 2015], with severe decay [Bücher et al, 2014], from low income [Demarco et al, 2012;Correa et al, 2013;van de Sande et al, 2013van de Sande et al, , 2016Metz et al, 2015] had significantly lower survival probabilities in their restorations.…”

“…Recently, it was recommended that the assessment of patient factors, such as socioeconomic status, caries risk/ activity/severity, and oral hygiene (among others), should become part of clinical studies investigating restoration survival, since several of these factors were shown to influence the failure of restorations [van de Sande et al, 2016]. A recent retrospective study comparing "complete" and "selective" caries removal in young permanent molars demonstrated that, regardless of caries removal technique, the restorations showed a restricted survival in patients with high caries activity and gingivitis [Casagrande et al, 2016].…”