Literature DB >> 15646221

Influence of different composite restoration techniques on cuspal deflection: an in vitro study.

S González-López1, C Lucena-Martín, F de Haro-Gasquet, M A Vilchez-Díaz, C de Haro-Muñoz.   

Abstract

Cuspal deflection produced by polymerization shrinkage was measured after using different composite restoration techniques. This study included 30 healthy premolars embedded in acrylic resin connected to a system that simulated intrapulpal pressure. A small ball was attached to each cuspal vertex as a reference point for intercuspal distance measurements. A large mesio-occlusal cavity was cut in each premolar. All premolars were treated with the same adhesive (ScotchBond) and composite (Tetric Ceram). The teeth were randomly distributed among three study groups: Group 1, filled with two horizontal increments; Group 2, filled with two horizontal increments, the first up to half the cavity height and light cured using a transparent plastic cone (Cerana), and the second filling the remainder of the cavity and Group 3, filled in the same way as Group 2, except that the first increment only filled one-third of the cavity height. The intercuspal distance was measured before beginning the restoration and immediately after polymerization of the first and second increments. Under the experimental conditions used, none of the filling techniques utilized avoided the cuspal deflection phenomenon. Polymerization of the final increment, which binds occlusal enamel in the buccal-lingual plane, was the main cause of cuspal deflection and produced a statistically significant reduction in intercuspal distance vs the baseline measurement in the three study groups. The global deflection ranged from 4 microm to 6 microm, depending on the filling technique used, although the differences among techniques did not reach statistical significance (p<0.05).

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15646221

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Dent        ISSN: 0361-7734            Impact factor:   2.440


  6 in total

Review 1.  Polymerization shrinkage assessment of dental resin composites: a literature review.

Authors:  Dalia Kaisarly; Moataz El Gezawi
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 2.634

2.  Comparative Assessment of Cuspal Deflection in Premolars Restored with Bulk-Fill and Conventional Composite Resins.

Authors:  Ebrahim Yarmohammadi; Shahin Kasraei; Yasaman Sadeghi
Journal:  Front Dent       Date:  2019-12-20

3.  Placement of Posterior Composite Restorations: A Cross-Sectional Study of Dental Practitioners in Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Mohamed M Awad; Mansour Alradan; Nawaf Alshalan; Ali Alqahtani; Feras Alhalabi; Mohammed Ali Salem; Ahmed Rabah; Ali Alrahlah
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 3.390

4.  Cuspal movement related to different bonding techniques using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesive systems.

Authors:  Edson Alves Campos; Marcelo Ferrarezi Andrade; Sizenando Toledo Porto-Neto; Lucas Arrais Campos; José Roberto Cury Saad; Tatiana Miranda Deliberador; Osmir Batista Oliveira-Júnior
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2009-07

5.  Influence of the curing method on the post-polymerization shrinkage stress of a composite resin.

Authors:  Leonardo Gonçalves Cunha; Roberta Caroline Bruschi Alonso; Eduardo José Carvalho de Souza-Junior; Ana Christina Elias Claro Neves; Lourenço Correr-Sobrinho; Mário Alexandre Coelho Sinhoreti
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.698

6.  Fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored by silorane-based composite with or without fiber or nano-ionomer.

Authors:  Fereshteh Shafiei; Maryam Sadat Tavangar; Yasamin Ghahramani; Zahra Fattah
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 1.904

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.