Fracture resistance of molar teeth with mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) restorations

Chai, Herzl; Lawn, Brian R.

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2017.04.019

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To preview the actual presentation, view the Proof. With recent advances in adhesive technology and the appearance of stronger composite materials, molar teeth with significant damage or carious lesion are routinely treated by extensive MOD cavity filling ( Chai and Lawn, 2017 ). In this study, deep MOD cavities were restored with various direct restorative techniques.…”

Section: Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture behaviour of MOD restorations reinforced by various fibre-reinforced techniques – An in vitro study

Sáry

Garoushi

Braunitzer³

et al. 2019

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fracture behaviour of MOD restorations reinforced by various fibre-reinforced techniques – An in vitro study

Sáry

Garoushi

Braunitzer³

et al. 2019

Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The mechanical system in posterior teeth resists fracture during mastication and facilitates more uniform stress distributions [33] since high modulus enamel (E = 80 GPa), is combined with more compliant dentin (E = 18 GPa). The mechanical behavior of premolars and molars, adhesively restored using different resin-based composites, has been investigated under occlusal loading either under laboratory conditions [9,12,33,34] or by means of finite element analysis of restored teeth [11,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]26].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…So, the primary origin of stress in a restored tooth usually comes by dimensional changes of the composite at the interface of tooth and restorative material or by occlusal loads [8]. These phenomena have been investigated both by laboratory experiments [9][10][11][12] and by finite element analysis [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adhesive class I restorations in sound molar teeth incorporating combined resin-composite and glass ionomer materials: CAD-FE modeling and analysis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To investigate the influence of different resin composite and glass ionomer cement material combinations in a "bi-layer" versus a "single-layer" adhesive technique for class I cavity restorations in molars using numerical finite element analysis (FEA). Materials and Methods: Three virtual restored lower molar models with class I cavities 4 mm deep were created from a sound molar CAD model. A combination of an adhesive and flowable composite with bulk fill composite (model A), of a glass ionomer cement with bulk fill composite (model B) and of an adhesive with bulk fill composite (model C), were considered. Starting from CAD models, 3D-finite element (FE) models were created and analyzed. Solid food was modeled on the occlusal surface and slide-type contact elements were used between tooth surface and food. Polymerization shrinkage was simulated for the composite materials. Physiological masticatory loads were applied to these systems combined with shrinkage. Static linear analyses were carried out. The maximum normal stress criterion was adopted as a measure of potential damage. Results: All models exhibited high stresses principally located along the tooth tissues-restoration interfaces. All models showed a similar stress trend along enamel-restoration interface, where stresses up to 22 MPa and 19 MPa was recorded in the enamel and restoration, respectively. A and C models showed a similar stress trend along the dentin-restoration interface with a lower stress level in model A, where stresses up to 11.5 MPa and 7.5 MPa were recorded in the dentin and restoration, respectively, whereas stresses of 17 MPa and 9 MPa were detected for model C. In contrast to A and C models, the model B showed a reduced stress level in dentin, in the lower restoration layer and no stress on the cavity floor. Significance. FE analysis supported the positive effect of a "bi-layer" restorative technique in a 4 mm deep class I cavities in lower molars versus "single-layer" bulk fill composite technique.

show abstract

“…When class I and mainly class II cavities are adhesively restored, stresses following the shrinkage process can act negatively, internally and marginally to produce a failure risk [7]. These phenomena have been investigated experimentally [8][9][10][11] and by means of finite element analysis [12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CAD-FE modeling and analysis of class II restorations incorporating resin-composite, glass ionomer and glass ceramic materials

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fracture resistance of molar teeth with mesial-occlusal-distal (MOD) restorations

Cited by 10 publications

References 25 publications

Fracture behaviour of MOD restorations reinforced by various fibre-reinforced techniques – An in vitro study

Fracture behaviour of MOD restorations reinforced by various fibre-reinforced techniques – An in vitro study

Adhesive class I restorations in sound molar teeth incorporating combined resin-composite and glass ionomer materials: CAD-FE modeling and analysis

CAD-FE modeling and analysis of class II restorations incorporating resin-composite, glass ionomer and glass ceramic materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About