Molar filling, composite, do these type of fillings shrink over time or what?

Don't ask why, but I had a few mercury fillings I've had since a kid drilled out in 2019, and replaced with composites.

7th tooth, upper.

I have no idea what they looked like prior to 2019.

After, I did notice one seemed oddly smaller than it's corresponding tooth on the opposite side.

Checking again now in 2024, sharp edges are apparent where the filling in the middle seems to have…. receeded?

But I don't actually know if that happened, or the dentist intentionally reduced the height of the tooth or what.

See the sharp edges?

Where as looking at the opposite side:

A lovely full tooth with that nice peak.

Not flat like on the filled/affected tooth.

…….

So, question TO A DENTIST, is the tooth in the top picture considered normal? (post filling)

Or should I get that looked at and patched in with additional composite? (is that even possible?)

Someone please tell me that composite can simply be "added to", instead of being replaced entirely?

Just to fill out that gap from shrinkage (I've just read via Prof Google that yes, shrinkage can absolutely happen with composites).

https://www.machenfamilydentistry.com/procedure-articles/white-fillings-composite-restorations

• Repairability: In many cases of minor damage to a composite filling, the damage can be easily repaired by adding additional composite. An amalgam filling might require complete replacement.

Not sure how valid of citation this is, but certainly a suggestion the composite can be simply "added to"?

HeidiHeidi

Why don't you go and see a dentist?

Why do you persist in thinking that some dentist can or will give you advice based on a selfie of your teeth posted on a discussion board?

How many more of these pointless threads are you going to open before you realise that you're not getting answers, and won't get any answers?

Haven't mercury amalgams been phased out in Ireland as well?

Question I'm asking is, if composites really have a lifespan of 5 to 7 years, where amalgams are typically 15+ years (or longer, a lifetime in many cases);

And every time a filling is changed, it depletes a little more of the natural tooth.

Then isn't the use of composites exclusively, especially for larger fillings in posterior teeth, potentially a detriment to the general populations dental well being?

i.e. more fillings, more often, more dental work, resulting in potentially weaker teeth and therefore more crowns/root-canals in later life?

CityDenalCentre

While composites have become popular due to their aesthetic appeal and bonding capabilities with tooth structure, their shorter lifespan compared to amalgams poses potential risks for patients requiring multiple restorations over time. Dentists must weigh these factors when recommending treatment options, especially for larger cavities in posterior teeth where strength and durability are critical.

In summary, while composites provide certain benefits, their use as a primary material for larger fillings could indeed lead to increased dental interventions in the long run due to their limited lifespan compared with amalgams.