The influence of cavity preparation design on fracture strength and mode of fracture of laboratory-processed composite resin restorations

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the sealing of composite resin restorations after cavity preparation with high speed diamonds burs or Er:YAG laser. Two different adhesive systems were used; conventional and self-etching. Seventy bovine incisors were divided into groups according to the cavity treatment (N = 10): G1 (bur + acid + Excite); G2 (bur + One Up); G3 (bur + laser + Excite); G3 (bur + laser + One Up); G4 (laser + acid + Excite); G5 (laser + One Up) and G6 (laser + Excite). Restorations were performed with Filtek Z250 3M/ESPE. The specimes were then thermocycled and placed in a vacuum machine, at a negative atmosphere of 20 inch Hg for 5 minutes, for removal of entrapped air. This procedure was followed by immersion in a 50% silver nitrate solution. The teeth were sectioned and the evaluation of the marginal leakage was performed in a light stereomicroscope. The results were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey statistical tests. It was concluded that preparations performed with high-speed turbines and Er:YAG laser presented the same performance; preparations with Er:YAG laser submitted to acid-etching and conventional adhesive system presented high values of marginal leakage, with statistical significance; conventional and self-etching adhesive systems presented the same performance as to marginal microleakage.

Download Full-text

Fracture strength of Class II composite resin restorations

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry ◽

10.1016/0022-3913(74)90031-6 ◽

1974 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 277-283

Author(s):

Dioracy Fonterrada Vieira ◽

Joa˜o Lucio Coradazzi ◽

Jose´ Mondelli

Keyword(s):

Fracture Strength ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Class Ii ◽

Composite Resin Restorations ◽

Resin Restorations

Download Full-text

Comparison of conventional ceramic laminate veneers, partial laminate veneers and direct composite resin restorations in fracture strength after aging

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials ◽

10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.104172 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 104172

Author(s):

Marco M.M. Gresnigt ◽

Mari M. Sugii ◽

Karin B.F.W. Johanns ◽

Stephan A.M. van der Made

Keyword(s):

Fracture Strength ◽

Composite Resin ◽

Composite Resin Restorations ◽

Laminate Veneers ◽

Resin Restorations

Download Full-text

Saucer-shaped cavity preparation for composite resin restorations in class II carious lesions: Three-year results

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry ◽

10.1016/0022-3913(93)90134-a ◽

1993 ◽

Vol 69 (2) ◽

pp. 155-159 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Hakon Nordbo ◽

Jakob Leirskar ◽

Frithjof R. von der Fehr

Keyword(s):

Composite Resin ◽

Class Ii ◽

Cavity Preparation ◽

Carious Lesions ◽

Composite Resin Restorations ◽

Resin Restorations

Download Full-text

Effect of Cavosurface Margin Configuration of Class V Cavity Preparations on Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice ◽

10.5005/jcdp-9-2-122 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 9 (2) ◽

pp. 122-129 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Marjaneh Ghavamnasiri ◽

Mahshid Bagheri

Keyword(s):

Composite Resin ◽

Nonparametric Analysis ◽

Cavity Preparation ◽

Class V ◽

Gingival Margin ◽

Dye Penetration ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Composite Resin Restorations ◽

Resin Restorations

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to compare the marginal leakage of hybrid and microfilled composite resin in Class V restorations with and without an enamel bevel. Methods and Materials Fifty-six cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 28 extracted human molars using a round bur with the dimensions of 3×2×1.5 mm. The specimens were divided into two groups of 28 based on the cavosurface margin configuration (beveled and non- beveled). Each group was then divided into two subgroups (n=14) based on the type of composite resin (microfilled and hybrid) used for restoration. After completing restorative procedure, specimens were thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine. Samples were embedded in polyester and then sectioned both mesiodistally and buccolingually. Dye penetration was observed with a stereomicroscope at 25x magnification. Statistical nonparametric analysis Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare the data (a=0.05). Results There was no statistically significant difference between the two types of composites and two types of enamel margins with respect to microleakage (P>5%). The degree of microleakage at the gingival margin located in dentin of each group was more than that of the enamel margin (P<5%). Conclusion An enamel bevel in a Class V cavity preparation had no effect on the reduction of marginal leakage using either hybrid or microfilled composite resin. Citation Bagheri M, Ghavamnasiri M. Effect of Cavosurface Margin Configuration of Class V Cavity Preparations on Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 February; (9)2:122-129.

Download Full-text