On the wear behavior and damage mechanism of bonded interface: Ceramic vs resin composite inlays

Yu, Ping; Xiong, Yuhuan; Zhao, Peng; Xu, Zhaoyi; Yu, Haiyang; Arola, D.; Gao, Shanshan

doi:10.1016/j.jmbbm.2019.103430

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is reasonable to assume that an ideal restorative material should have mechanical and tribological properties similar to the dental tissues [2,33]. Previous researches reported that enamel is more wear-resistant than resin composite under the same experimental conditions [2,34,35]. However the materials tested exhibited significantly lower resistance to wear than the enamel but not than the dentin substrate.…”

Section: Graphmentioning

confidence: 97%

Wear Patterns of Adhesive Interfaces over Different Materials

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate differences in surface wear of enamel-material and dentin-material bonded interfaces obtained from upper molars samples and subjected to cycling occlusal load. Methods: Forty-eight flat specimens of enamel-material and dentin-material bonded interfaces were prepared using different restorative materials with both CAD-CAM techniques and direct techniques. After the bonding and cementation procedures specimens were tested with a chewing machine with a stainless-steel ball on flat sliding contact (20N loads, 50.000 cycles). Wear analysis and comparison of the enamel or dentin substrates and the three restorative materials was performed using a 3D profilometer and analyzed with ANOVA test and post-hoc comparison procedures. Finally worn surfaces were examined with optical microscopy. Results: Statistical analysis after simulated chewing cycles identified a significant influence of the factor “substrate” (p<0.05) and of the factor “restorative material” (p<0.05). The enamel results in being more wear resistant than dentin, and also more resistant than all the restorative materials tested. Considering the materials, the most severe wear loss was observed with micro-hybrid composite paste. CAD-CAM materials showed a wear rate significantly better both in association with enamel and dentin. An interesting wear pattern was found at the bonded interface level and the oval shapes obtained from the profilometer images underlined a repetitive wear pattern with the central zone more consumed and decreasing depth moving towards the perimeter. Initials signs of cracks were showed in enamel interfaces at the optical microscopy analysis. Conclusions: Both the dental substrate and the restorative material significantly affect the wear behavior of a toothmaterial interface after cyclic fatigue. Thus, the initial null hypotheses were rejected.

show abstract

Section: Graphmentioning

confidence: 97%

Wear Patterns of Adhesive Interfaces over Different Materials

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, resin composite inlays release shrinkage stresses at the interface of the tooth structure thereby promoting the creation and extension of cracks in the enamel. Therefore, ceramic inlays can be more efficient in restoring CTS than resin composite inlays [ 108 ].…”

Section: Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Cracked Tooth Syndrome: Etiology, Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention

Diao

Wang

et al. 2021

Pain Research and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cracked tooth syndrome refers to a series of symptoms caused by cracked teeth. This article reviews the current literature on cracked tooth syndrome from four aspects, etiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention, to provide readers integrated information about this. The article begins with an introduction to the odontiatrogenic factors and then covers the noniatrogenic factors that induce cracked tooth syndrome. While the former discusses inappropriate root canal therapy and improper restorative procedures, the latter covers the topics such as the developmental and functional status of cracked tooth syndrome. This is then followed by the description of common clinical diagnosis methods, the prospects of new technologies, and summaries of current clinical management methods, including immediate management and direct and indirect restoration. In the final section, preventive methods and their importance are proposed, with the aim of educating the common population.

show abstract

“…Thus, the Bass toothbrushing technique might lead to degradation and removal of the resin cement layer at supragingival margin preparations for indirect restorations. Also, the shrinkage stress generated during the polymerization reaction can debond the resin cement to ceramic or tooth, damaging the adhesive interface by the gap formation 4 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mechanical properties of the resin cement are inferior compared with ceramics and dental enamel, making it the most critical region in the cementing area. In cases of poor adaptation of the indirect restoration to the cavity margins, the resin cement can be thick, compromising the marginal sealing of tooth structure 1 , 4 , 5 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toothbrushing effects on the surface roughness and cement volume loss of bonded enamel-ceramic interface

Marins,

Araújo-Neto,

Sahadi

et al. 2023

Braz. Dent. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effect of toothbrushing on enamel-cementing material-ceramic bonded interfaces, using different cementing materials. Materials and Methods: Thirty enamel and thirty ceramic blocks were bonded with cementing materials to produce the samples that were bonded with three types of cementing materials: 1- RelyX Ultimate resin cement (REXU), 2- RelyX Unicem 2 self-adhesive resin cement (REU2) and 3- heated Z100 restorative composite (60°C). Bonded interfaces of the samples were toothbrushed and the surfaces of the 3 cementing materials were evaluated for roughness (RG, in µm), roughness profile (RP, in µm), and volume loss (VL, in µm3) (baseline and after 20,000 and 60,000 toothbrushing cycles). Data were evaluated by Generalized Linear Analysis (two factors: “material” and “toothbrushing cycle”) and Bonferroni test (α=0.05). Results: REXU and Z100 exhibited lower RG than that presented by REU2, except after 60,000 toothbrushing cycles when only Z100 differed from REU2. The increase in toothbrushing cycles increased the RG and RP for all materials. REU2 also showed higher RP than those showed by REXU and Z100 when it was analyzed regarding the enamel. The VL of Z100 was the lowest with 20,000 toothbrushing cycles, regarding the enamel and ceramic. For 60,000 cycles, REXU showed the lowest VL regarding the ceramic, and REU2 had the highest VL regarding the enamel and ceramic. Conclusion: In general, REXU and Z100 showed the best results regarding the evaluations performed and the REU2 exhibited the highest RG, RP, and VL.

show abstract

On the wear behavior and damage mechanism of bonded interface: Ceramic vs resin composite inlays

Cited by 14 publications

References 46 publications

Wear Patterns of Adhesive Interfaces over Different Materials

Wear Patterns of Adhesive Interfaces over Different Materials

Review of Cracked Tooth Syndrome: Etiology, Diagnosis, Management, and Prevention

Toothbrushing effects on the surface roughness and cement volume loss of bonded enamel-ceramic interface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About