A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth
The purpose of this study was to test the support to undermined occlusal enamel provided by posterior restorative composite (FiltekTM P60, 3M Dental products USA), polyacid modified resin composite (F2000 compomer, 3M Dental products, USA.), radiopaque silver alloy-glass ionomer cement (Miracle Mix....
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2006-09-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2006;volume=24;issue=3;spage=122;epage=126;aulast=Prabhakar |
| _version_ | 1830404430463238144 |
|---|---|
| author | Prabhakar A Thejokrishna P Kurthukoti A |
| author_facet | Prabhakar A Thejokrishna P Kurthukoti A |
| author_sort | Prabhakar A |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The purpose of this study was to test the support to undermined occlusal enamel provided by posterior restorative composite (FiltekTM P60, 3M Dental products USA), polyacid modified resin composite (F2000 compomer, 3M Dental products, USA.), radiopaque silver alloy-glass ionomer cement (Miracle Mix. GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan) and Glass Ionomer cement (Fuji IX GP). To test each material, 20 human permanent mandibular third molars were selected. The lingual cusps were removed and the dentin supporting the facial cusps was cut away, leaving a shell of enamel. Each group of prepared teeth was restored using the materials according to the manufacturer′s instructions. All the specimens were thermocycled (250 cycles, 6°C- 60°C, dwell time 30 seconds) and then mounted on an acrylic base. Specimens were loaded evenly across the cusp tips at a crosshead speed of 5 mm /minute in Hounsfield universal testing machine until fracture occurred. Data obtained was analyzed using analysis of variance and Studentized- Newman- Keul′s range test. No significant differences were detected in the support provided by P-60, F 2000, Miracle Mix or Fuji IX GP groups. The support provided to undermined occlusal enamel by these materials was intermediate between no support and that provided by sound dentin. Without further development in dental material technology and evidence of its efficacy, restorative materials should not be relied upon to support undermined occlusal enamel to a level comparable to that provided by sound dentin. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-20T17:25:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-21b665b0327748b6bc8b939b3f48ccb3 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0970-4388 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-20T17:25:38Z |
| publishDate | 2006-09-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry |
| spelling | doaj.art-21b665b0327748b6bc8b939b3f48ccb32022-12-21T19:31:35ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry0970-43882006-09-01243122126A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teethPrabhakar AThejokrishna PKurthukoti AThe purpose of this study was to test the support to undermined occlusal enamel provided by posterior restorative composite (FiltekTM P60, 3M Dental products USA), polyacid modified resin composite (F2000 compomer, 3M Dental products, USA.), radiopaque silver alloy-glass ionomer cement (Miracle Mix. GC Corp, Tokyo, Japan) and Glass Ionomer cement (Fuji IX GP). To test each material, 20 human permanent mandibular third molars were selected. The lingual cusps were removed and the dentin supporting the facial cusps was cut away, leaving a shell of enamel. Each group of prepared teeth was restored using the materials according to the manufacturer′s instructions. All the specimens were thermocycled (250 cycles, 6°C- 60°C, dwell time 30 seconds) and then mounted on an acrylic base. Specimens were loaded evenly across the cusp tips at a crosshead speed of 5 mm /minute in Hounsfield universal testing machine until fracture occurred. Data obtained was analyzed using analysis of variance and Studentized- Newman- Keul′s range test. No significant differences were detected in the support provided by P-60, F 2000, Miracle Mix or Fuji IX GP groups. The support provided to undermined occlusal enamel by these materials was intermediate between no support and that provided by sound dentin. Without further development in dental material technology and evidence of its efficacy, restorative materials should not be relied upon to support undermined occlusal enamel to a level comparable to that provided by sound dentin.http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2006;volume=24;issue=3;spage=122;epage=126;aulast=PrabhakarBondingcarious dentinocclusionreinforcementundermined enamel |
| spellingShingle | Prabhakar A Thejokrishna P Kurthukoti A A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Bonding carious dentin occlusion reinforcement undermined enamel |
| title | A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| title_full | A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| title_fullStr | A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| title_short | A comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| title_sort | comparative evaluation of four restorative materials to support undermined occlusal enamel of permanent teeth |
| topic | Bonding carious dentin occlusion reinforcement undermined enamel |
| url | http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2006;volume=24;issue=3;spage=122;epage=126;aulast=Prabhakar |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT prabhakara acomparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth AT thejokrishnap acomparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth AT kurthukotia acomparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth AT prabhakara comparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth AT thejokrishnap comparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth AT kurthukotia comparativeevaluationoffourrestorativematerialstosupportunderminedocclusalenamelofpermanentteeth |