Archive \ Volume.14 2023 Issue 3

Longevity of Posterior Composite Restorations and Their Reasons for Failure: A Systematic Review

, ,


The decision-making process determines how long repairs last. Recent evidence suggests that other variables have a predominant impact on the clinical efficacy of composite restorations, as the current restorative composites are not the issue anymore. Age, caries and occlusal stress risk, socioeconomic position, and occupational characteristics (gender, clinical experience) may be some of these. Using databases including PubMed, Medline, and ScienceDirect, a systematic review of the literature spanning 2010 to 2022 was conducted. "Posterior composite," "longevity of composites," and "composite failure" were the main phrases employed. The PRISMA flow chart shows the procedure for selecting articles to be searched. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane method for assessing the risk of bias. A total of 9 studies were incorporated after thorough screening and a majority of them revealed highly satisfactory longevity and lower failure rate of posterior composite restorations. composites can be successfully placed for posterior cavities, whereas, the operator’s experience and the use of fiber post are the most significant factors in determining the longevity.

Downloads: 62
Views: 64

How to cite:
Ansari SH, Alkhalil G, Alhaj S. Longevity of Posterior Composite Restorations and Their Reasons for Failure: A Systematic Review. Arch Pharm Pract. 2023;14(3):14-20.
Ansari, S. H., Alkhalil, G., & Alhaj, S. (2023). Longevity of Posterior Composite Restorations and Their Reasons for Failure: A Systematic Review. Archives of Pharmacy Practice, 14(3), 14-20.

Download Citation

1.        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. 2013:33-42.

2.        Raj V, Macedo GV, Ritter AV, Swift Jr EJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2007;19(1):3-5.

3.        Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater. 2012;28(1):87-101.

4.        Van de Sande FH, Collares K, Correa MB, Cenci MS, Demarco FF, Opdam NJ. Restoration survival: revisiting patients' risk factors through a systematic literature review. Oper Dent. 2016;41(S7):S7-26.

5.        Demarco FF, Collares K, Coelho-de-Souza FH, Correa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, et al. Anterior composite restorations: A systematic review on long-term survival and reasons for failure. Dent Mater. 2015;31(10):1214-24.

6.        Veloso SR, Lemos CA, de Moraes SL, do Egito Vasconcelos BC, Pellizzer EP, de Melo Monteiro GQ. Clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional resin composite restorations in posterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clini Oral Investig. 2019;23:221-33.

7.        Wanyonyi KL, Radford DR, Gallagher JE. The relationship between access to and use of dental services following expansion of a primary care service to embrace dental team training. Public Health. 2013;127(11):1028-33.

8.        Campos EA, Michel MD, Gonzaga CC. Customized fiber glass posts. Fatigue and fracture resistance. Am J Dent. 2012;25(1).

9.        Palotie U, Eronen AK, Vehkalahti K, Vehkalahti MM. Longevity of 2-and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25-to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service—A 13-year observation. J Dent. 2017;62:13-7.

10.      Laske M, Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Braspenning JC, Huysmans MC. Longevity of direct restorations in Dutch dental practices. Descriptive study out of a practice based research network. J Dent. 2016;46:12-7.

11.      Naghipur S, Pesun I, Nowakowski A, Kim A. Twelve-year survival of 2-surface composite resin and amalgam premolar restorations placed by dental students. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(3):336-9.

12.      Pallesen U, van Dijken JW, Halken J, Hallonsten AL, Höigaard R. Longevity of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth in Public Dental Health Service: a prospective 8 years follow up. J Dent. 2013;41(4):297-306.

13.      Wong C, Blum IR, Louca C, Sparrius M, Wanyonyi K. A retrospective clinical study on the survival of posterior composite restorations in a primary care dental outreach setting over 11years. J Dent. 2021;106:103586.

14.      Kubo S, Kawasaki A, Hayashi Y. Factors associated with the longevity of resin composite restorations. Dent Mater J. 2011;30(3):374-83.

15.      Pummer A, Cieplik F, Nikolić M, Buchalla W, Hiller KA, Schmalz G. Longevity of posterior composite and compomer restorations in children placed under different types of anesthesia: a retrospective 5-year study. Clin Oral Investig. 2020;24:141-50.

16.      Montagner AF, Sande FH, Müller C, Cenci MS, Susin AH. Survival, reasons for failure and clinical characteristics of anterior/posterior composites: 8-year findings. Braz Dent J. 2018;29:547-54.

17.      Laegreid T, Gjerdet NR, Johansson AK. Extensive composite molar restorations: 3 years clinical evaluation. Acta Odontol Scand. 2012;70(4):344-52.

18.      Kitasako Y, Sadr A, Burrow MF, Tagami J. Thirty‐six month clinical evaluation of a highly filled flowable composite for direct posterior restorations. Aust dent j. 2016;61(3):366-73.

19.      Loguercio AD, Rezende M, Gutierrez MF, Costa TF, Armas-Vega A, Reis A. Randomized 36-month follow-up of posterior bulk-filled resin composite restorations. J Dent. 2019;85:93-102.

20.      Scotti N, Eruli C, Comba A, Paolino DS, Alovisi M, Pasqualini D, et al. Longevity of class 2 direct restorations in root-filled teeth: A retrospective clinical study. J Dent. 2015;43(5):499-505.

21.      Demarco FF, Collares K, Correa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJ. Should my composite restorations last forever? Why are they failing?. Braz Oral Res. 2017;31.

22.      Lynch CD, Blum IR, McConnell RJ, Frazier KB, Brunton PA, Wilson NH. Teaching posterior resin composites in UK and Ireland dental schools: do current teaching programmes match the expectation of clinical practice arrangements?. Br Dent J. 2018;224(12):967-72.

23.      Blum IR, Özcan M. Reparative dentistry: possibilities and limitations. Curr Oral Health Rep. 2018;5(4):264-9.

24.      Zahdan BA, Szabo A, Gonzalez CD, Okunseri EM, Okunseri CE. Survival rates of stainless steel crowns and multi-surface composite restorations placed by dental students in a pediatric clinic. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2018;42(3):167-72.

25.      Pinto GD, Oliveira LJ, Romano AR, Schardosim LR, Bonow ML, Pacce M, et al. Longevity of posterior restorations in primary teeth: results from a paediatric dental clinic. J Dent. 2014;42(10):1248-54.

26.      Van de Sande FH, Opdam NJ, Da Rosa Rodolpho PA, Correa MB, Demarco FF, Cenci MS. Patient risk factors’ influence on survival of posterior composites. J Dent Res. 2013;92(7_suppl):S78-83.

27.      Baldissera RA, Corrêa MB, Schuch HS, Collares K, Nascimento GG, Jardim PS, et al. Are there universal restorative composites for anterior and posterior teeth?. J Dent. 2013;41(11):1027-35.

28.      Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Loomans BA, Huysmans MC. 12-year survival of composite vs. amalgam restorations. J Dent Res. 2010;89(10):1063-7.

29.      El-Safty S, Silikas N, Watts DC. Creep deformation of restorative resin-composites intended for bulk-fill placement. Dent Mater. 2012;28(8):928-35.

30.      Peumans M, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B. Thirteen-year randomized controlled clinical trial of a two-step self-etch adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. Dent Mater. 2015;31(3):308-14.

31.      Bucuta S, Ilie N. Light transmittance and micro-mechanical properties of bulk fill vs. conventional resin based composites. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18:1991-2000.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.