| Literature DB >> 34674197 |
Apirat Ritthiti1, Vanthana Sattabanasuk2, Kavin Karunratanakul3, Pisol Senawongse2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different types and restorative techniques of Class I composite restorations with a single loading force on stress distribution and cyclic loading force on microleakage formation.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34674197 PMCID: PMC9339919 DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735433
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Dent
Fig. 1Tooth model with Class I cavity. ( A ) Three-dimensional tooth model, ( B ) dimensions of occlusal cavity are 30.40 × 27.16 × 24.74 × 27.16 mm, and ( C ) depth of the cavity is 40 mm from the central groove.
Elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio of enamel, dentin, the hybrid layer, adhesive resin, flowable composites, and composite resin
| Structures | Poisson's ratio | Elastic modulus (GPa) |
|---|---|---|
| Enamel |
0.25
| 88.5 ± 5.43 |
| Dentin |
0.30
| 25.63 ± 3.23 |
| Hybrid layer |
0.30
| 12.75 ± 1.47 |
| Filtek Z250 |
0.25
| 20.88 ± 1.26 |
| Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restorative |
0.25
| 11.60 ± 0.59 |
| Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative |
0.28
| 5.26 ± 0.05 |
| Single Bond Universal |
0.35
| 1.26 ± 0.51 |
| Fuji II LC (as pulp) |
0.35
| 8.23 ± 2.10 |
Fig. 2Stress distribution from finite element analysis of three-dimensional model 1 of each structure after receiving 50 N occlusal loading onto the composite resin. ( A ) enamel, ( B ) dentin, ( C ) hybrid layer, ( D ) adhesive layer, ( E ) composite resin, and ( F ) glass-ionomer cement.
Fig. 3Finite element analysis. ( A ) Model 1, ( B ) Model 2, ( C ) Model 3, ( D ) Model 4, ( E ) Model 5, (F), and Model 6.
Materials' details according to manufacturer's data
| Materials | Compositions | Percent of filler by volume | Percent of filler by weight | Manufacturer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Filtek Z250 | Resin matrix: Bis-GMA, TEGDMA, UDMA, Bis-EMA | 60 | 78 | 3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States |
| Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restoration | Resin matrix: Bis-GMA, UDMA, Bis-EMA, AUDMA, AFM, DDDMA | 58.4 | 76.5 | 3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States |
| Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restoration | Resin matrix: Bis-GMA, TEGDMA, UDMA, Bis-EMA, Bis-PMA | 64.5 | 42.5 | 3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States |
| Single Bond Universal Adhesive | MDP phosphate monomer, dimethacrylate resins, HEMA, modified polyalkenoic acid copolymer, silane, filler, ethanol, water | n/a | n/a | 3M ESPE, St. Paul, Minnesota, United States |
| GC Fuji II LC Capsule | Liquid: Distilled water, Polyacrylic acid, HEMA, UDMA, Comphorquinone | GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan |
Abbreviations: AFM, addition fragmentation monomer; AUDMA, aromatic urethane dimethacrylate; Bis-EMA, ethoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate; Bis-GMA, bisphenol A diglycidyl methacrylate; DDDMA, dodecanediol dimethacrylate; HEMA, hydroxyethyl methacrylate; MDP, methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate; n/a, not available; TEGDMA, triethyl glycol dimethacrylate; UDMA, urethane dimethacrylate.
Fig. 4Microcomputed tomography images for microleakage analysis.
Maximum Von Mises stresses (MPa) by the effect of occlusal loading in each substrate
| Model | Enamel | Dentin | Hybrid layer | Adhesive | Flowable Co | Composite | Glass-ionomer cement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | 0.10040 | 0.10673 | 0.06208 | 0.00979 | 11.616 | 0.01392 | |
| Model 2 | 0.17187 | 0.19882 | 0.06742 | 0.01779 | 0.22378 | 5.8669 | 0.01915 |
| Model 3 | 0.12403 | 0.14739 | 0.05504 | 0.01054 | 0.02894 | 5.9837 | 0.01926 |
| Model 4 | 0.10646 | 0.12683 | 0.04745 | 0.01056 | 0.01657 | 9.8271 | 0.02157 |
| Model 5 | 0.12397 | 0.12989 | 0.05708 | 0.01210 | 6.6683 | 0.01505 | |
| Model 6 | 0.12658 | 0.15244 | 0.05553 | 0.01090 | 0.13162 | 9.5324 | 0.01909 |
Deformation (mm) by the effect of occlusal loading in each substrate
| Groups | Enamel | Dentin | Hybrid layer | Adhesive | Flowable Co | Composite | Glass-ionomer cement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | 0.00016 | 0.00013 | 0.00013 | 0.00016 | 0.00084 | 0.00007 | |
| Model 2 | 0.00020 | 0.00015 | 0.00015 | 0.00020 | 0.00029 | 0.00087 | 0.00007 |
| Model 3 | 0.00016 | 0.00012 | 0.00013 | 0.00016 | 0.00011 | 0.00078 | 0.00007 |
| Model 4 | 0.00019 | 0.00014 | 0.00014 | 0.00019 | 0.00020 | 0.00102 | 0.00007 |
| Model 5 | 0.00021 | 0.00016 | 0.00016 | 0.00021 | 0.00134 | 0.00008 | |
| Model 6 | 0.00024 | 0.00018 | 0.00018 | 0.00024 | 0.00024 | 0.00165 | 0.00009 |
Means and standard deviations of volumetric microleakage
| Groups | Microleakage (mm 3 ) | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| |
| Group 1 | 0.038 ± 0.012 aB | 0.096 ± 0.007 bD |
| Group 2 | 0.015 ± 0.003 aA | 0.045 ± 0.007 bBC |
| Group 3 | 0.023 ± 0.013 aAB | 0.057 ± 0.006 bC |
| Group 4 | 0.014 ± 0.011 aA | 0.032 ± 0.110 bAB |
| Group 5 | 0.014 ± 0.004 aA | 0.029 ± 0.008 bA |
| Group 6 | 0.031 ± 0.015 aAB | 0.045 ± 0.010 aBC |
Note: Data with different uppercase letters in columns and lowercase letters in rows indicate significant differences ( p ≤0.05).