| Literature DB >> 32802773 |
Swathi Pai1, Vishal Bhat2, Vathsala Patil3, Nithesh Naik4, Swetank Awasthi4, Nithin Nayak4.
Abstract
AIM: Adhesive restoration does not depend primarily on the configuration of the shape of the cavity. Under varying loading conditions, it is essential to know the stress concentration and load transfer mechanism for distinct cavity shapes. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical characteristics of various cavity shapes, namely oval, elliptical, trapezoidal, and rectangular shapes of class V cavities on mandibular premolars restored with amalgam, glass ionomer cement, and Cention N using three-dimensional (3D) finite element analysis.Entities:
Keywords: Cavity shapes; Stress distribution; dental materials; dentistry; finite element analysis; restoration
Year: 2020 PMID: 32802773 PMCID: PMC7402252 DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_75_20
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Soc Prev Community Dent ISSN: 2231-0762
Mechanical properties of the tooth and supporting structures used in the study
| Materials | Modulus of elasticity (MPa) | Poisson’s ratio(µ) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enamel | 84,100 | 0.33 | [ |
| Dentin | 13,700 | 0.31 | [ |
| Cementum | 18,600 | 0.31 | [ |
| Cention N | 13,000 | 0.3 | [ |
| Glass ionomer | 10,800 | 0.3 | [ |
| Amalgam | 35,000 | 0.35 | [ |
Figure 1Finite element meshed model of mandibular premolar tooth. (A) Crescent. (B) Oval. (C) Rectangle. (D) Trapezium
Mesh convergence study
| Type | Nodes | Elements | von Mises stress (in MPa) | Total deformation (in mm) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum | Minimum | Maximum | Minimum | |||
| Coarse | 40,160 | 23,000 | 169.42 | 30.099 | 0.112 | 0.03501 |
| Medium | 55,037 | 31,011 | 160.3 | 29.79 | 0.11307 | 0.0358 |
| Fine | 79,453 | 45,153 | 160.35 | 30.315 | 0.11333 | 0.03603 |
Distribution of von Mises stress for class V restored cavity
| Shape | Material | von Mises stress (MPa) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal load | Normal + oblique load | ||||||||
| 100 N | 150 N | 200 N | 250 N | 100 N | 150 N | 200 N | 250 N | ||
| Crescent | Cention | 0.53 | 0.80 | 1.06 | 1.33 | 1.12 | 1.68 | 2.25 | 2.81 |
| Amalgam | 0.86 | 1.29 | 1.73 | 2.16 | 2.60 | 3.90 | 5.20 | 6.50 | |
| GIC | 0.49 | 0.73 | 0.97 | 1.21 | 1.05 | 1.58 | 2.11 | 2.64 | |
| Oval | Cention | 0.49 | 0.73 | 0.97 | 1.22 | 1.03 | 1.55 | 2.06 | 2.58 |
| Amalgam | 0.98 | 1.47 | 1.96 | 2.45 | 1.77 | 2.66 | 3.55 | 4.43 | |
| GIC | 0.45 | 0.67 | 0.89 | 1.12 | 0.96 | 1.43 | 1.91 | 2.39 | |
| Trapezium | Cention | 0.52 | 0.77 | 1.03 | 1.29 | 1.30 | 1.96 | 2.61 | 3.26 |
| Amalgam | 1.09 | 1.63 | 2.17 | 2.72 | 2.66 | 3.99 | 5.32 | 6.65 | |
| GIC | 0.46 | 0.69 | 0.92 | 1.15 | 1.25 | 1.87 | 2.49 | 3.12 | |
| Rectangle | Cention | 0.51 | 0.77 | 1.03 | 1.28 | 1.17 | 1.76 | 2.35 | 2.94 |
| Amalgam | 0.91 | 1.37 | 1.83 | 2.28 | 2.59 | 3.89 | 5.19 | 6.49 | |
| GIC | 0.47 | 0.70 | 0.93 | 1.17 | 1.11 | 1.66 | 2.21 | 2.76 | |
GIC = glass ionomer cement
Figure 2The distribution of von Mises stress on the class V restored cavity for a normal load of 250N. (A) Trapezium. (B) Rectangle. (C) Oval. (D) Crescent
Figure 3The distribution of von Mises stress on class V restored cavity for a combined (normal and oblique) load of 250N. (A) Trapezium. (B) Rectangle. (C) Oval. (D) Crescent