scholarly journals Microleakage of Nanofilled Composite Resin Restorative Material

2011 ◽  
Vol 02 (03) ◽  
pp. 329-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ibrahim Hamouda ◽  
Hagag abd Elkader ◽  
Manal F. Badawi
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Restorative Material

scholarly journals THE COMPARISON OF RESIN-BASED COMPOSITES PHYSICAL PROPERTIES BETWEEN BULK-FILL TECHNIQUE AND INCREMENTAL TECHNIQUE

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 85
Author(s):  
Rahmi Khairani Aulia
Keyword(s):  
Physical Properties ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Color Stability ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Polymerization Shrinkage ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Restoration Technique ◽  
Restoration Failure

ABSTRACT:Composite resins are currently the most popular restorative material in dentistry. This is due to good aesthetics and maximum conservation ability. Behind these advantages, there are disbenefits of composite resin materials, such as polymerization shrinkage, which can lead to restoration failure. Various attempts have been investigated to reduce the shrinkage incidence of composite resins, one of which is the technique of placing the restorative material into the cavity. The restoration filling technique is recognized as a significant factor in shrinkage stress. By using a special filling technique, the polymerization shrinkage damage stress can be reduced. There are several techniques in performing composite resin fillings, including bulk and incremental techniques. These techniques have their respective advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this literature review was to compare the physical properties of composite resin restorations with bulk filling and incremental techniques. Physical properties that being studied include polymerization shrinkage, stress shrinkage, degree of conversion, bonding strength, water resorption, color stability, and temperature increase. Comparing the two techniques, composite resin with incremental filling technique has superior physical properties compared to bulk technique. From the comparison of the two techniques, the composite resin with incremental filling technique has superior physical properties compared to the bulk technique, especially in higher conversion which causes lower shrinkage stress. This situation makes the incremental technique provide better bond strength, water resorption, color stability, and lower temperature rise.Keywords: Bulk, Composite Resin, Incremental,  Physical Properties, Restoration, Restoration Technique

scholarly journals AN IN VITRO COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE MOUTH RINSES (ALCOHOL CONTAINING AND ALCOHOL FREE) ON THE MICROHARDNESS OF A NANOFILLED COMPOSITE RESIN RESTORATIVE MATERIAL

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 420-428
Author(s):  
Santhosh P. Sagar ◽  
◽  
Sahadev Chickmagarvalli Krishnegowda ◽  
Praveen Kumar M.R ◽  
Bharath Makonahalli Jaganath ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Evaluation ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Mouth Rinses

Early Management and Histology of a Severely Malformed Upper Incisor

1987 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-104
Author(s):  
C. J. W. Patterson ◽  
B. D. Collin ◽  
M.S. Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Visible Light ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Central Incisor ◽  
Restorative Dentistry ◽  
Early Management ◽  
Orthodontic Therapy

A case is presented wherein a severely malformed permanent central incisor was reshaped utilizing a visible light cured composite resin restorative material and retained for two years pending the commencement of active orthodontic therapy. The orthodontic implications of this case are discussed as are the histological and restorative dentistry aspects. The need for a combined, interdisciplinary approach to such problems is emphasized.

Amalgam or composite resin? Factors influencing the choice of restorative material

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
pp. 703-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.B. Correa ◽  
M.A. Peres ◽  
K.G. Peres ◽  
B.L. Horta ◽  
A.D. Barros ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Factors Influencing

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Microtensile Bond Strength of Three Restorative Materials

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 6688-6694
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Tensile Bond Strength ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Third Molars ◽  
Microtensile Bond Strength ◽  
Flowable Composite ◽  
Carious Lesions ◽  
Occlusal Surfaces ◽  
Frequent Failure

The present study aimed to compare the micro-tensile bond strength of new and conventional glass-ionomers and Z350 flowable composite resin to sound and caries-affected dentin. Eighty extracted third molars were selected. Standard Cl I cavities were prepared on occlusal surfaces. Forty teeth were assigned to the sound tooth group, and in the remaining 40 teeth, carious lesions were produced using a laboratory technique. Then each group (n=40) was subdivided into 5 groups (n=8) in terms of the restorative material used (EQUIA® Forte, Ketac Molar, encapsulated and hand-mixed GC Fuji II LC glass-ionomers and Z350 flowable composite resin). The cavities were restored. The highest micro-tensile bond strength was recorded with Z350 flowable composite resin in sound dentin (29.65), and the lowest was recorded with GC Fuji II LC (powder, liquid) in affected dentin (7.88). Significant differences were detected in the micro-tensile bond strength between the 5 restorative material groups. The composite resin bond strength was the maximum and was significantly different from all the other groups. The micro-tensile bond strength was affected by the type of dentin; in this context, in all the restorative groups, the bond strength in sound dentin was significantly higher than that in affected dentin. The most frequent failure mode was adhesive in the sound and affected dentin.

scholarly journals Assessment of the preferred restorative material – composite resin or ceramic – for anterior teeth restoration

RSBO ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 06-10
Author(s):  
Fernanda Haverroth Schünemann ◽  
Jonas Alberto Valmorbida ◽  
Jussara Karina Bernardon
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Visual Analysis ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Restorative Material ◽  
Cost Factor ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Natural Teeth ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Decision Choice ◽  
Material Composite

To evaluate the perception of clinicians and undergraduate students concerning their preferences and experience in using composite resin and ceramic veneers to restore anterior teeth restorations. Material and methods: 60 participants including clinicians (n=30) and undergraduate students (n=30) volunteered for this study. The study consisted of two parts. Firstly, the participant answered questions about their use and possible failure of ceramic or composite resin for anterior teeth. In the second part, participants analyzed 3 photographs of the anterior smile and reported on the presence of healthy teeth or restored teeth, with composite resin or ceramic veneers. Results: For both groups, composite resin was frequently used over ceramic and the most important reported factor in this decision choice was the cost factor. Both groups presented a failure percentage higher than 50% for composite resin, and this percentage was higher for undergraduate students. In the visual analysis of the photographs, none of the participants identified all the restorations correctly. Conclusion: Composite resin is the most common material of choice for clinicians and undergraduate students. Distinguishing natural teeth from restored teeth has become increasingly difficult, despite the restorative material (composite resin or ceramic) used.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document