Short fibre-reinforced composite for extensive direct restorations: a laboratory and computational assessment

Barreto, Bruno de Castro Ferreira; Ende, Annelies Van; Lise, Diogo Pedrollo; Noritomi, Pedro Yoshito; Jaecques, Siegfried; Sloten, Jos Vander; Munck, Jan De; Meerbeek, Bart Van

doi:10.1007/s00784-015-1576-3

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparing the fracture resistance, although the fracture values of all SFRC were higher than the other groups, the difference was not significant. This result is in accordance with Barreto et al who compared the fracture resistance of CFC and SFRC + CFC in premolar teeth and Fráter et al who found higher fracture toughness and load bearing capacity with SFRC compared with CFC without any significant differences. On the other hand, Gaourishi et al and Kemaloglu et al found higher fracture results with SFRC comparing with CFC.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored Either with Short Fiber or Polyethylene Woven Fiber‐Reinforced Composite

Gürel

Kıvanç

Ekıcı

et al. 2016

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored Either with Short Fiber or Polyethylene Woven Fiber‐Reinforced Composite

Gürel

Kıvanç

Ekıcı

et al. 2016

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to the previously‐mentioned studies, Atalay et al., Rocca et al., and Barreto et al. reported that the incorporation of SFRC inside the cavity of posterior destroyed teeth restored with thick PFC resin overlays is not useful to increase their load‐bearing capacity or to yield a better failure mode after load to fracture . They explained that the discrepancy between their studies and previous studies stemmed from a difference in the thickness of overlay PFC composites, loading set‐up, and the adhesive system used.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Short fiber‐reinforced composite restorations: A review of the current literature

Garoushi

Gargoum

Vallittu

et al. 2018

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A newly-recommended method for restoring large cavities is the biomimetic approach of using short fiber-reinforced composite (SFRC) as dentine-replacing material. The aim of the current review was to present an overview of SFRC and to give the clinician a detailed understanding of this new material and treatment strategy based on available-literature review. A thorough literature search was done up to December 2017. The range of relevant publications was surveyed using PubMed and Google Scholar. From the search results, articles related to our search terms were only considered. The search terms used were "short fiber-reinforced composite", "everX posterior", and "fiber-reinforced composite restorations". Of the assessed articles selected (N = 70), most were laboratory-based research with various test specimen designs prepared according to the ISO standard or with extracted teeth; only four articles were clinical reports. A common finding was that by combining the SFRC as a bulk base with conventional composite, the load-bearing capacity and failure mode of the material combination were improved, as compared to plain conventional composite restoration. In the reviewed studies, the biomimetic restoration technique of using SFRC showed promising characteristics, and therefore, might be recommended as an alternative treatment option for large cavities.

show abstract

“…20,41 Fatigue strength of teeth restored with this material also did not differ from that of a conventional composite. 42 The only report on the material's K Ic showed a significantly higher value, compared to other commercial composites. 43 In order to understand the effect of fibers on composite properties, it is important to look at the variables involved in fiber reinforcement using systematic experimental designs.…”

Section: Strategy 2a: Fiber-reinforced Compositesmentioning

confidence: 88%

Trends in restorative composites research: what is in the future?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical trials have identified secondary caries and bulk fracture as the main causes for composite restoration failure. As a measure to avoid frequent reinterventions for restoration replacement, composites with some sort of defense mechanism against biofilm formation and demineralization, as well as materials with lower susceptibility to crack propagation are necessary. Also, the restorative procedure with composites are very time-consuming and technically demanding, particularly concerning the application of the adhesive system. Therefore, together with bulk-fill composites, self-adhesive restorative composites could reduce operator error and chairside time. This literature review describes the current stage of development of remineralizing, antibacterial and self-healing composites. Also, an overview of the research on fiber-reinforced composites and self-adhesive composites, both introduced for clinical use in recent years, is presented.

show abstract

Short fibre-reinforced composite for extensive direct restorations: a laboratory and computational assessment

Abstract: The restoration of extensive cavities in posterior tooth is a challenge for the clinicians and the choice of the material that increases the fracture strength of tooth-restoration complex is required.

Cited by 22 publications

References 28 publications

Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored Either with Short Fiber or Polyethylene Woven Fiber‐Reinforced Composite

Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored Either with Short Fiber or Polyethylene Woven Fiber‐Reinforced Composite

Short fiber‐reinforced composite restorations: A review of the current literature

Trends in restorative composites research: what is in the future?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About