[Clinical comparison of different cervical fillings after one year]

Cervical lesions in 38 patients were restored using composite resins (n = 57), the "sandwich-technique" (n = 64) or glassionomercement (n = 66). Immediately following insertion and 4, 8, and 12 months later, the restorations were examined clinically and in the SEM. Two composite fillings and one filling each of the two other types of restoration were lost. After one year the quality of the dentinal margins of the composite restorations was statistically (p less than 0.05) inferior to the two other methods. Margin quality in enamel was rated superior (p less than 0.05) with glassionomercement as against the other materials. Clinically, the composite filling yielded poorer results regarding marginal integrity and discoloration, although in general they showed superior esthetics. In restoring cervical lesions the use of glassionomercements or the "sandwich-technique" has definite advantages over composite fillings. For the evaluation of new restorative materials and techniques, SEM should be used in addition to clinical examinations.