A fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) fixed prosthesis is an innovative alternative to a traditional metal restoration, as it is a conservative treatment method. This case report demonstrates a detailed procedure for restoring a missing anterior tooth with an FRC. A 44-year-old woman visited our department with an avulsed tooth that had fallen out on the previous day and was completely dry. This tooth was replanted, but it failed after one year. A semi-direct technique was used to fabricate a FRC fixed partial prosthesis for its replacement. The FRC framework and the pontic were fabricated using a duplicated cast model and nanofilled composite resin. Later on, interproximal contact, tooth shape, and shade were adjusted at chairside. This technique not only enables the clinician to replace a missing tooth immediately after extraction for minimizing esthetic problems, but it also decreases both tooth reduction and cost.

This article complies a survey on the replacement of the posterior restorations and accesses possible factors that influence the replacement of posterior restorations.

The data was collected from patients that visited department of conservative dentistry from Dec 1st 2003, to Sep 3rd 2004. Teeth was restricted to posterior permanent teeth. 9 dentists recorded age, gender of patients, tooth location, cavity form and restorative material. They rated marginal adaptation, anatomic form, secondary caries of old restoration by modified Ryge criteria system. The statistical analysis was performed with Chi square test (p < 0.05) for replacement ratio according to patients, tooth factor and One-way ANOVA was performed for comparison of old restoration according to restorative material.

The results were as follows;

1. The female (62%) was statistically higher ratio than the male (38%).

2. The distribution of replacement case according to age, the rate of replacement was in descending order, 20's (38.3%), 40's (16.8%), 30's (15.9%), 10's (11.1%), 50's (9.2%), 60's (8.7%).

3. The rate of replacement was 88% for molar and 12% for premolar (p < 0.05).

4. The rate of replacement was 39% for maxillar and 61% for mandible (p < 0.05).

5. The material of restorations was amalgam (69%), gold inlay (17%), composite resin (13%).

6. In rating system by modified Ryge criteria system on margin adaptation, there was statistically significant difference between amalgam and gold inlay. But on anatomic form and caries, there was no statistically significant difference among the material of restorations.