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.
Materials And Methods: Class I cavities were prepared in premolars with 4 mm depth and divided into six groups of different restorations with: (1) Filtek Z250; (2) a 3-mm-thick layer of Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restoration and covered with Z250; (3) a 1.5-mm-thick layer of flowable composite and covered with Z250; (4) lining all cavity with flowable composite and restored with Z250; (5) Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior Restoration; and (6) lining all cavity with flowable composite and restored with bulk-fill composite. The specimens with and without cyclic occlusal loading were subjected to microleakage observation. In addition, six different models of Class I restorations corresponding to the microleakage study were generated. Finite element analysis (FEA) was used to identify the stress distribution under a single loading force.
Statistical Analysis: Data were statistically analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and multiple comparison. The significance level set at 0.05.
Results: Cavity lining or restoration with flowable composite underneath conventional composite reduced stress on composite resin based on FEA (groups 2 and 3). The cyclic stress on composite increased microleakage. Restoration with flowable composite underneath conventional composite reduced the microleakage in Class I restoration (groups 2, 3, and 4).
Conclusion: The most effective cavity lining with a flowable composite underneath conventional composite restoration was stress reduction under loading force resulting in microleakage reduction.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9339919 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1735433 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!