The purpose of present study was to evaluate the polymerization shrinkage stress and cuspal deflection in maxillary premolars resulting from polymerization shrinkage of composites and compomers.

Composites and compomers which were used in this study were as follows: Dyract AP, Z100, Surefil, Pyramid, Synergy Compact, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, and Compoglass F. For measuring of polymerization shrinkage stress, Stress measuring machine (R&B, Daejon, Korea) was used. One-way ANOVA analysis with Duncan's multiple comparison test were used to determine significant differences between the materials.

For measuring of cuspal deflection of tooth, MOD cavities were prepared in 10 extracted maxillary premolars. And reduction of intercuspal distance was measured by strain measuring machine (R&B, Daejon, Korea) One-way ANOVA analysis with Turkey test were used to determine significant differences between the materials.

Polymerization shrinkage stress is 『Heliomolar, Z100, Pyramid < Synergy Compact Compoglass F < Dyract AP < Heliomolr HB, surefil』 (P < 0.05). And cuspal delfelction is 『Z100, Heliomolar, Heliomolar HB, Synergy Compact Surefil, < Compoglass F < Pyramid, Dyract AP』 (P < 0.05).

Measurements of ploymerization shrinkage stress and those of cuspal deflection of the teeth was different. There is no correlation between polymerization shrinkage stress and cuspal deflection of the teeth (p > 0.05).

The first purpose of present study was to compare the anticariogenic effect of compomer, resin modified glass ionomer cement and composite (RMGIC).

The second purpose was to evaluate the recently introduced methods, which use confocal scanning microscope, in detecting initial caries around restoration.

2×4×1.5mm cavities were prepared from the recently extracted 50 human teeth on the buccal or lingual surface. The prepared teeth were randomly devided into 5 groups and restored with each filling material. Group 1: Dyract AP, Group 2: compoglass F, Group 3: F2000, Group 4: Z100, Group 5:Fuji Ⅱ LC. The teeth were stored for 30 days in the distilled water, then stored in the buffer solution for artificial caries development; pH 4.3, lactic acid 100 mM, calcium 16 mM, phosphate 8mM, sodium azide 3mM. Then, the samples were sectioned longitudinally and examined with confical scanning microscope. The results showed that the use of compomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement showed caries inhibition zone whereas the composite did not. There was no difference in the width of caries inhibition zone between compomers and RMGIC. The confocal scanning microscope was useful in detecting initial caries around restoration.