Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-12.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Cuspal deflection in class V cavities restored with composite resins


Your browser does not support the NLM PubReader view.

Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.

Cuspal deflection in class V cavities restored with composite resins

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2008;33(2):83-89
Publication date (electronic) : 2008 March 31
doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2008.33.2.083
Jun-Gyu Park1, Bum-Soon Lim2, In-Bog Lee1
1Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Korea.
2Department of Dental Biomaterials Science, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Korea.
Corresponding Author: In-Bog Lee. Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, 275-1 Yeongeon-Dong, Jongno-Gu, Seoul 110-768, Korea. Tel: 82-2-2072-3953, Fax: 82-2-2072-3859, inboglee@snu.ac.kr
Received 2008 January 24; Revised 2008 February 15; Accepted 2008 February 22.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the polymerization shrinkage and modulus of elasticity of composites on the cusp deflection of class V restoration in premolars. The sixteen extracted upper premolars were divided into 2 groups with similar size. The amounts of cuspal deflection were measured in Class V cavities restored with a flowable composite (Filtek flow) or a universal hybrid composite (Z-250). The bonded interfaces of the sectioned specimens were observed using a scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The polymerization shrinkage and modulus of elasticity of the composites were measured to find out the effect of physical properties of composite resins on the cuspal deflection. The results were as follows.

  1. The amounts of cuspal deflection restored with Filtek flow or Z-250 were 2.18 ± 0.92 µm and 2.95 ± 1.13 µm, respectively. Filtek flow showed less cuspal deflection but there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05).

  2. The two specimens in each group showed gap at the inner portion of the cavity.

  3. The polymerization shrinkages of Filtek flow and Z-250 were 4.41% and 2.23% respectively, and the flexural modulus of elasticity of cured Filtek flow (7.77 GPa) was much lower than that of Z-250 (17.43 GPa).

  4. The cuspal deflection depends not only on the polymerization shrinkage but also on the modulus of elasticity of composites.

Keywords: Cuspal deflection; Composite resin; Polymerization shrinkage; Modulus of elasticity; Bonded interface

References

1. Watts DC, Cash AJ. Determination of polymerization shrinkage kinetics in visible-light-cured materials: methods development. Dent Mater 1991. 7(4)281–287.
2. Lee IB, Cho BH, Son HH, Um CM. A new method to measure the polymerization shrinkage kinetics of light cured composites. J Oral Rehabil 2005. 32(4)304–314.
3. Lee IB, Cho BH, Son HH, Um CM, Lim BS. The effect of consistency, specimen geometry and adhesion on the axial polymerization shrinkage measurement of light cured composites. Dent Mater 2006. 22(11)1071–1079.
4. Davidson CL, de Gee AJ, Feilzer AJ. The competition between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res 1984. 63(12)1396–1399.
5. Neiva IF, de Andrada MA, Baratieri LN, Monteiro S, Ritter AV Jr. An in vitro study of the effect of restorative technique on marginal leakage in posterior composites. Oper Dent 1998. 23(6)282–289.
6. Holan G, Levin M, Bimstein E, Grajower R, Eidelman E. Clinical, radiographic, SEM evaluation and assessment of microleakage of class II composite restorations. Am J Dent 1989. 2(5)274–278.
7. Eick JD, Welch FH. Polymerization shrinkage of posterior composite resins and its possible influence on postoperative sensitivity. Quintessence Int 1986. 17(2)103–111.
8. Opdam NJ, Roeters FJ, Feilzer AJ, Verdonschot EH. Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in Class 2 resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent 1998. 26(7)555–562.
9. Pearson GJ, Hegarty SM. Cusp movement of molar teeth with composite filling materials in conventional and modified MOD cavities. Br Dent J 1989. 166(5)162–165.
10. Meredith N, Setchell DJ. In vitro measurement of cuspal strain and displacement in composite restored teeth. J Dent 1997. 25(3-4)331–337.
11. Segura A, Donly KJ. In vitro posterior composite polymerization recovery following hygroscopic expansion. J Oral Rehabil 1993. 20(5)495–499.
12. Rees JS, Jagger DC, Williams DR, Brown G, Duguid W. A reappraisal of the incremental packing technique for light cured composite resins. J Oral Rehabil 2004. 31(1)81–84.
13. Abbas G, Fleming GJ, Harrington E, Shortall AC, Burke FJ. Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. J Dent 2003. 31(6)437–444.
14. Fleming GJ, Hall DP, Shortall AC, Burke FJ. Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with posterior filling materials of varying reported volumetric shrinkage values. J Dent 2005. 33(2)139–146.
15. Lee MR, Cho BH, Son HH, Um CM, Lee IB. Influence of cavity dimension and restoration methods on the cusp deflection of premolars in composite restoration. Dent Mater 2007. 23(3)288–295.
16. McCullock AJ, Smith BG. In vitro studies of cuspal movement produced by adhesive restorative materials. Br Dent J 1986. 161(11)405–409.
17. Versluis A, Douglas WH, Cross M, Sakaguchi RL. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996. 75(3)871–878.
18. Feilzer AJ, Dooren LH, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Influence of light intensity on polymerization shrinkage and integrity of restoration-cavity interface. Eur J Oral Sci 1995. 103(5)322–326.
19. Uno S, Asmussen E. Marginal adaptation of a restorative resin polymerized at reduced rate. Scand J Dent Res 1991. 99(5)440–444.
20. Alomari QD, Reinhardt JW, Boyer DB. Effect of liners on cusp deflection and gap formation in composite restorations. Oper Dent 2001. 26(4)406–411.
21. Davidson CL, deGee AJ. Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow in dental composites. J Dent Res 1984. 63(2)146–148.
22. Brännström M. Communication between the oral cavity and the dental pulp associated with restorative treatment. Oper Dent 1984. 9(2)57–68.
23. Brännström M, Johnson G, Linden LA. Fluid flow and pain response in the dentin produced by hydrostatic pressure. Odontol Revy 1969. 20(1)15–30.

Article information Continued

Copyright © 2008 Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
(open-access) :

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Specimen mounted on the cuspal deflection measuring instrument.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Mean cuspal deflection of class V composite restorations in premolars.

Figure 3-a

Figure 3-a

SEM image of Z-250 specimen with a good bonding interface.

Figure 3-b

Figure 3-b

SEM image of Z-250 specimen with a gap in the bonding interface.

Figure 3-c

Figure 3-c

SEM image of Filtek flow specimen with a good bonding interface.

Figure 3-d

Figure 3-d

SEM image of Filtek flow specimen with a gap in the bonding interface.

Table 1

Mean tooth size used in this study

Table 1

(CT-CEJ: distance between buccal cusp tip and cemento-enamel junction, BL: maximum bucco-lingual width, MD: maximum mesio-distal width)

Table 2

Mean flexural strength, modulus of elasticity and polymerization shrinkage of composites

Table 2