Literature DB >> 17555182

Influence of beveling and ultrasound application on marginal adaptation of box-only Class II (slot) resin composite restorations.

Patrick R Schmidlin1, Karin Wolleb, Thomas Imfeld, Markus Gygax, Adrian Lussi.   

Abstract

A laboratory study was performed to assess the influence of beveling the margins of cavities and the effects on marginal adaptation of the application of ultrasound during setting and initial light curing. After minimal access cavities had been prepared with an 80 microm diamond bur, 80 box-only Class II cavities were prepared mesially and distally in 40 extracted human molars using four different oscillating diamond coated instruments: (A) a U-shaped PCS insert as the non-beveled control (EMS), (B) Bevelshape (Intensiv), (C) SonicSys (KaVo) and (D) SuperPrep (KaVo). In groups B-D, the time taken for additional bevel finishing was measured. The cavities were filled with a hybrid composite material in three increments. Ultrasound was also applied to one cavity per tooth before and during initial light curing (10 seconds). The specimens were subjected to thermomechanical stress in a computer-controlled masticator device. Marginal quality was assessed by scanning electron microscopy and the results were compared statistically. The additional time required for finishing was B > D > C (p < or = 0.05). In all groups, thermomechanical loading resulted in a decrease in marginal quality. Beveling resulted in higher values for "continuous" margins compared with that of the unbeveled controls. The latter showed better marginal quality at the axial walls when ultrasound was used. Beveling seems essential for good marginal adaptation but requires more preparation time. The use of ultrasonic vibrations may improve the marginal quality of unbeveled fillings and warrants further investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17555182     DOI: 10.2341/06-84

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


  5 in total

1.  A randomized double-blind clinical trial of posterior composite restorations with or without bevel: 1-year follow-up.

Authors:  Fábio Herrmann Coelho-De-Souza; Junara Cristina Camargo; Tiago Beskow; Matheus Dalmolin Balestrin; Celso Afonso Klein-Júnior; Flávio Fernando Demarco
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.698

2.  One-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill composite resin restorations plasticized by preheating and ultrasonics: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Girija S Sajjan; Gnana Sindhu Dutta; K Madhu Varma; R Kalyan Satish; Anil Kumar Pulidindi; Vishal Babu Kolla
Journal:  J Conserv Dent       Date:  2022-05-02

3.  Effect of resealing on microleakage of resin composite restorations in relationship to margin design and composite type.

Authors:  Sibel A Antonson; A Ruya Yazici; Zeynep Okte; Patricia Villalta; Donald E Antonson; Patrick C Hardigan
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2012-10

Review 4.  Evidence provided for the use of oscillating instruments in restorative dentistry: A systematic review.

Authors:  Panagiotis Ntovas; Spyridon Doukoudakis; John Tzoutzas; Panagiotis Lagouvardos
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

5.  Influence of different tooth preparation and bonding techniques on the fracture resistance of tooth fragment reattachment.

Authors:  Shaymaa M Nagi; Sherif M Khadr
Journal:  Biomater Investig Dent       Date:  2021-07-20
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.