Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases and interface treatments. “Post-fatigue adaptation of indirect composite restorations”

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study evaluated the influence of different composite bases and surface treatments on marginal and internal adaptation of class II indirect composite restorations, after simulated occlusal loading. Thirty-two class II inlay cavities were prepared on human third molars, with margins located in cementum. A 1-mm composite base extending up to the cervical margins was applied on all dentin surfaces in the experimental groups; impressions were made and composite inlays fabricated. The following experimental conditions were tested: no liner (control group), flowable composite treated with soft air abrasion (experiment 1), flowable composite sandblasted (experiment 2) and restorative composite sandblasted (experiment 3). All specimens were submitted to 1,000,000 cycles with a 100-N eccentric load. Tooth–restoration margins were analysed semi-quantitatively by scanning electron microscopy before and after loading; internal adaptation was also evaluated after test completion. The percentage of perfect adaptation in enamel was 79.5% to 92.7% before loading and 73.3% to 81.9% after loading. Perfect adaptation to dentin was reduced before loading (54.8% to 77.6%) and after loading (41.9% to 63%), but no difference was found among groups for pre- and post-loading conditions. No debonding occurred between the base and composite luting. A significant, negative influence of cyclic loading was observed. The results of the present study support the use of flowable or restorative composites as base/liner underneath large class II restorations. Soft air abrasion represents a potential alternative to airborne particle abrasion for treating cavities before cementation. The application of a composite base underneath indirect composite restorations represents a feasible non-invasive alternative to surgical crown lengthening to relocate cavity margins from an intra-crevicular to supra-gingival position.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lutz F, Kull M (1980) The development of a posterior tooth composite system, in vitro investigation. SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd 90:455–483

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lutz F, Krejci I, Luescher B, Oldenburg TR (1986) Improved proximal margin adaptation of class II composite resin restorations by use of light-reflecting wedges. Quintessence Int 17:659–664

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lutz E, Krejci I, Oldenburg TR (1986) Elimination of polymerization stresses at the margins of posterior composite resin restorations: a new restorative technique. Quintessence Int 17:777–784

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Weaver WS, Blank LW, Pelleu GB Jr (1988) A visible-light-activated resin cured through tooth structure. Gen Dent 36:236–237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bertolotti R (1991) Posterior composite technique utilizing directed polymerization shrinkage and a novel matrix. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 3:53–58

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Donly KJ, Wild TW, Bowen RL, Jensen ME (1989) An in vitro investigation of the effects of glass inserts on the effective composite resin polymerization shrinkage. J Dent Res 68:1234–1237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, Mortazavi F (1997) Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations. Oper Dent 22:21–29

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bowen RL, Nemoto K, Rapson JE (1983) Adhesive bonding of various materials to hard tooth tissues: forces developing in composite materials during hardening. J Am Dent Assoc 106:475–477

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Davidson CL, de Gee AJ, Feilzer A (1984) The competition between the composite–dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res 63:1396–1399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. de Gee AF, Feilzer AJ, Davidson CL (1993) True linear polymerization shrinkage of unfilled resins and composites determined with a linometer. Dent Mater 9:11–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kildal KK, Ruyter IE (1997) How different curing methods affect mechanical properties of composites for inlays when tested in dry and wet conditions. Eur J Oral Sci 105:353–361

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dietschi D, Spreafico R (1997) Adhesive metal free restorations: current concepts for the aesthetic treatment of posterior teeth. Quintessence, Berlin, pp 60–77

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dietschi D, Spreafico R (1998) Current clinical concepts for adhesive cementation of tooth-colored posterior restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 10:47–54

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rocca GT, Krejci I (2007) Bonded indirect restorations for posterior teeth: from cavity preparation to provisionalization. Quintessence Int 38:371–379

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL (1990) Marginal integrity related to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems. J Prosthet Dent 64:658–664

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL (1990) Complete marginal seal of class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res 69:1240–1243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ausiello P, Rengo S, Davidson CL, Watts DC (2004) Stress distributions in adhesively cemented ceramic and resin–composite class II inlay restorations: a 3D-FEA study. Dent Mater 20:862–872

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scott JA, Strang R, Saunders WP (1992) The plane of fracture and shear bond strength of three composite inlay systems. Dent Mater 8:208–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Krejci I, Fullemann J, Lutz F (1994) Clinical and long-term scanning electron microscopic studies of composite inlays. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 104:1351–1356

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Magne P, Knezevic A (2009) Thickness of CAD-CAM composite resin overlays influences fatigue resistance of endodontically treated premolars. Dent Mater 25:1264–1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rodrigues SA Jr, Ferracane JL, Della Bona A (2009) Influence of surface treatments on the bond strength of repaired resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater 25:442–451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ciucchi B, Bouillaguet S, Holz J, Pashley D (1995) Dentinal fluid dynamics in human teeth, in vivo. J Endod 21:191–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Krejci I, Reich T, Lutz F, Albertoni M (1990) An in vitro test procedure for evaluating dental restoration systems. 1. A computer-controlled mastication simulator. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 100:953–960

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Krejci I, Heinzmann JL, Lutz F (1990) The wear on enamel, amalgam and their enamel antagonists in a computer-controlled mastication simulator. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 100:1285–1291

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Luescher B, Lutz F, Ochsenbein H, Muhlemann HR (1977) Microleakage and marginal adaptation in conventional and adhesive class II restoration. J Prosthet Dent 37:300–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Roulet J (1990) Degradation of dental polymers. Karger, Basel, pp 108–10

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ausiello P, Apicella A, Davidson CL (2002) Effect of adhesive layer properties on stress distribution in composite restorations—a 3D finite element analysis. Dent Mater 18:295–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dietschi D, Olsburgh S, Krejci I, Davidson C (2003) In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases. Eur J Oral Sci 111:73–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chuang SF, Jin YT, Liu JK, Chang CH, Shieh DB (2004) Influence of flowable composite lining thickness on class II composite restorations. Oper Dent 29:301–308

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dewaele M, Asmussen E, Devaux J, Leloup G (2006) Class II restorations: influence of a liner with rubbery qualities on the occurrence and size of cervical gaps. Eur J Oral Sci 114:535–541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brannstrom M (1966) The hydrodynamics of the dental tubule and pulp fluid: its significance in relation to dentinal sensitivity. Annu Meet Am Inst Oral Biol 23:219

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Paul SJ, Scharer P (1997) The dual bonding technique: a modified method to improve adhesive luting procedures. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 17:536–545

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bertschinger C, Paul SJ, Luthy H, Scharer P (1996) Dual application of dentin bonding agents: effect on bond strength. Am J Dent 9:115–119

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Dietschi D, Herzfeld D (1998) In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of class II resin composite restorations after thermal and occlusal stressing. Eur J Oral Sci 106:1033–1042

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Magne P, Douglas WH (1999) Porcelain veneers: dentin bonding optimization and biomimetic recovery of the crown. Int J Prosthodont 12:111–121

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Magne P, So WS, Cascione D (2007) Immediate dentin sealing supports delayed restoration placement. J Prosthet Dent 98:166–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T (2007) Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials—fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater 23:343–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Stavridakis MM, Krejci I, Magne P (2005) Immediate dentin sealing of onlay preparations: thickness of pre-cured dentin bonding agent and effect of surface cleaning. Oper Dent 30:747–757

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rocca GT, Krejci I (2007) Bonded indirect restorations for posterior teeth: the luting appointment. Quintessence Int 38:543–553

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Dietschi D (2003) Evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of adhesive class II restorations. Dissertation, ACTA University of Amsterdam

  41. Bouillaguet S, Ciucchi B, Jacoby T, Wataha JC, Pashley D (2001) Bonding characteristics to dentin walls of class II cavities, in vitro. Dent Mater 17:316–321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Purk JH, Dusevich V, Glaros A, Eick JD (2007) Adhesive analysis of voids in class II composite resin restorations at the axial and gingival cavity walls restored under in vivo versus in vitro conditions. Dent Mater 23:871–877

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rees JS, Jacobsen PH, Hickman J (1994) The elastic modulus of dentine determined by static and dynamic methods. Clin Mater 17:11–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Kinney JH, Balooch M, Marshall SJ, Marshall GW Jr, Weihs TP (1996) Hardness and Young's modulus of human peritubular and intertubular dentine. Arch Oral Biol 41:9–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kinney JH, Balooch M, Marshall GW, Marshall SJ (1999) A micromechanics model of the elastic properties of human dentine. Arch Oral Biol 44:813–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

Authors declare that they have no financial, professional or other personal interest that could influence the position presented in this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Cariology and Endodontology, School of Dentistry, University of Geneva, 19 Rue Barthélémy Menn, 1205, Geneva, Switzerland

    Giovanni Tommaso Rocca, Ladislav Gregor, Maria Jose Sandoval, Ivo Krejci & Didier Dietschi

  2. Department for the Practice of the General Dentistry, Case Western University, Cleveland, OH, USA

    Didier Dietschi

Authors
  1. Giovanni Tommaso Rocca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ladislav Gregor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria Jose Sandoval
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ivo Krejci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Didier Dietschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giovanni Tommaso Rocca.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rocca, G.T., Gregor, L., Sandoval, M.J. et al. In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases and interface treatments. “Post-fatigue adaptation of indirect composite restorations”. Clin Oral Invest 16, 1385–1393 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0632-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-011-0632-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation