Class I restorations and restorations placed using rubber dam presented better AFR .
An elevated number of failures were observed due to recurrent caries , highlighting the need for professionals to work with a health-promoting approach .
BACKGROUND Several restorative material s with specific indications are used for filling cavities in primary teeth .
AIM To systematic ally review the literature in order to investigate the longevity of primary teeth restorations  and the reasons for failure .
Randomized clinical trial of adhesive restorations in primary molars. 18-month results.
PURPOSE To evaluate the clinical performance of adhesive restorations of resin composite and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements in primary molars . METHODS This r and omized clinical trial included subjects ( 5 - 9 year-old children ) selected at two university centers ( UFRGS and UNIFRA ) . The sample consisted of 132 primary molars presenting active cavitated carious lesions ( with radiographic involvement of the inner half of the dentin ) , located on the occlusal and occlusal-proximal surface . The sample was r and omly divided into three groups , according to the restorative material : ( G1 ) universal restorative system ( Adper Single Bond 2 system and Filtek Z350 ) ; ( G2 ) : Resin-modified glass-ionomer cement ( Vitremer ) ; and ( G3 ) : Low shrink restorative system ( Filtek P90 ) . The restorations were clinical ly and radiographically followed every 6 months for up to 18 months using the USPHS modified criteria for clinical evaluation . Survival estimates for restoration longevity were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method . Log-rank test ( P < 0.05 ) was used to compare the differences in the success rate according to the type of the restorative material . RESULTS The type of restorative material used did not influence the longevity of the restorations . After clinical follow-up , there was no statistical difference in the rates of success for the three material s used to restore active cavitated carious lesions in primary molars . The survival rates for the follow-up were similar regarding the number of restored surfaces and the caries removal technique ( partial or complete ) . Mean estimated time of survival was 17.2 months ( 95 % CI : 16.7 - 17.7 ) . Estimated survival rates of the restorations were 100 % , 98 % , 88 % and 65 % at 1 , 6 , 12 and 18 months of clinical evaluations , respectively
Class I restorations and restorations placed using rubber dam presented better AFR .
An elevated number of failures were observed due to recurrent caries , highlighting the need for professionals to work with a health-promoting approach .
BACKGROUND Several restorative material s with specific indications are used for filling cavities in primary teeth .
AIM To systematic ally review the literature in order to investigate the longevity of primary teeth restorations  and the reasons for failure .