scholarly journals Properties of a Dental Resin Composite with a Spherical Inorganic Filler

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 734-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Lu ◽  
Y. K. Lee ◽  
M. Oguri ◽  
J. M. Powers
Keyword(s):  
Bonding Strength ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Bonding Agent ◽  
Inorganic Filler ◽  
Dental Resin ◽  
Nano Composite ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Spherical Filler

Clinical Relevance Of the materials tested in this study, the spherical filler composite (Estelite Σ) had similar properties as the nano-composite (Filtek Supreme). Thus, Estelite Σcan be used in anterior regions and restricted posterior restorations. All the materials had a similar shrinkage pattern, in that about 99% of the shrinkage occurred prior to 24 hours; thus, for direct resin composite restorations, a strong initial bonding strength with bonding agent would be necessary.

scholarly journals Amalgam and Composite Posterior Restorations: Curriculum Versus Practice in Operative Dentistry at a US Dental School

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 524-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. E. Ottenga ◽  
I. A. Mjör
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Dental School ◽  
Operative Dentistry ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Posterior Restorations

Clinical Relevance There is an undeniable move away from amalgam towards the use of resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. The data from one dental school suggests that dental curricula are not keeping pace with the clinical shift that has occurred.

scholarly journals Comparison of Proximal Contacts of Class II Resin Composite Restorations In Vitro

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 688-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. A. C. Loomans ◽  
N. J. M. Opdam ◽  
F. J. M. Roeters ◽  
E. M. Bronkhorst ◽  
R. C. W. Burgersdijk
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Composite Restoration

Clinical Relevance When placing a Class II resin composite restoration, the use of sectional matrix systems and separation rings to obtain tight proximal contacts is recommended.

Gingival Microleakage of Class II Resin Composite Restorations with Fiber Inserts

10.2341/06-86 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 298-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
O. El-Mowafy ◽  
W. El-Badrawy ◽  
A. Eltanty ◽  
K. Abbasi ◽  
N. Habib
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Fiber Inserts

Clinical Relevance Fiber inserts incorporated at the gingival floor of Class II composite restorations resulted in a significant reduction of microleakage scores as compared to restorations made without inserts. This may lead to a reduced incidence of recurrent caries.

Factors Associated with Microleakage in Class II Resin Composite Restorations

10.2341/06-16 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Idriss ◽  
T. Abduljabbar ◽  
C. Habib ◽  
R. Omar
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Gap Size ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Placement Technique

Clinical Relevance Even though marginal gap size was not shown to be a direct predictor for the extent of microleakage in resin composite restorations, both material and placement technique appear to be important determinants in microleakage and, thus, probably in clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals A 3-year randomized clinical trial evaluating two different bonded posterior restorations: Amalgam versus resin composite

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (01) ◽  
pp. 016-022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hande Kemaloglu ◽  
Tijen Pamir ◽  
Huseyin Tezel
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Public Health Service ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Posterior Restorations ◽  
Postoperative Sensitivity

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the performance and postoperative sensitivity of a posterior resin composite with that of bonded amalgam in 40 (n = 20) large sized cavities and to evaluate whether resin composite could be an alternative for bonded amalgam. Materials and Methods: This was a randomized clinical trial. Twenty patients in need of at least two posterior restorations were recruited. Authors randomly assigned one half of the restorations to receive bonded amalgam and the other half to composite restorations. Forty bonded amalgams (n = 20) and composites (n = 20) were evaluated for their performance on modified-US Public Health Service criteria and postoperative sensitivity using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 36-months. Results: Success rate of this study was 100%. First clinical alterations were rated as Bravo after 1 year in marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation, anatomical form, and surface roughness for both amalgam and composite. At the 3rd year, overall “Bravo” rated restorations were 12 for bonded amalgam and 13 for resin composites. There were no significant differences among the VAS scores of composites and bonded amalgams for all periods (P > 0.05) except for the comparisons at the 3rd year evaluation (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitation of this study, both resin composite and bonded amalgam were clinically acceptable. Postoperative sensitivity results tend to decrease more in composite restorations rather than amalgams. Therefore, it was concluded that posterior resin composite can be used even in large sized cavities.

scholarly journals Marginal Permeability of Self-etch and Total-etch Adhesive Systems

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. M. Owens ◽  
W. W. Johnson ◽  
E. F. Harris
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Class V ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Dentin Surface ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Surface Anatomy ◽  
Self Etch

Clinical Relevance Decreased leakage was associated with Adper Scotchbond Multi-Purpose (total etch) and iBond (self-etch) systems in Class V resin composite restorations. All adhesive systems performed best when bonded to enamel compared to dentin surface anatomy. Clinicians should be aware that strict adherence to manufacturer instructions, when using these materials, is of primary importance.

Two-year Clinical Effectiveness of Adhesives and Retention Form on Resin Composite Restorations of Non-carious Cervical Lesions

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 507-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
S-Y. Kim ◽  
K-W. Lee ◽  
S-R. Seong ◽  
M-A. Lee ◽  
I-B. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Retention Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Cervical Lesions ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Observation Period

Clinical Relevance Over a two–year observation period, ScotchBond Multi-Purpose was found to have significantly superior marginal adaptation compared to Adper Prompt. Restorations using retention forms showed a significantly higher retention rate in an experimental adhesive and significantly less marginal discoloration in all three adhesives.

The Influence of Matrix Type on the Proximal Contact in Class II Resin Composite Restorations

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 454-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Kampouropoulos ◽  
C. Paximada ◽  
M. Loukidis ◽  
A. Kakaboura
Keyword(s):  
Contact Area ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Matrix Type ◽  
Composite Restorations

Clinical Relevance The types of matrices assessed, metal or transparent, circumferential or sectional, straight or pre-contoured, were not able to adequately reconstruct all the characteristics of the proximal contact area of an intact tooth in Class II resin composite restorations.

Clinical Comparison of Bur- and Laser-prepared Minimally Invasive Occlusal Resin Composite Restorations: Two-year Follow-up

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 500-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. R. Yazici ◽  
M. Baseren ◽  
J. Gorucu
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Promising Alternative ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Clinical Comparison ◽  
Prepared Composite

Clinical Relevance The laser could be a promising alternative for minimally invasive occlusal resin composite cavity preparations, as its clinical performance was similar to bur-prepared composite restorations.

Clinical Evaluation of Indirect Composite Restorations at Baseline and 36 Months After Placement

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Dukic ◽  
O. L. Dukic ◽  
S. Milardovic ◽  
B. Delija
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Good Choice ◽  
Hybrid Resin ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Clinical Difference ◽  
Indirect Composite

Clinical Relevance Indirect resin composite restorations represent a good choice for the therapy of severely damaged teeth. There is no clinical difference between Ormocer and nano-hybrid resin composite after 36 months.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document