Cargando…

Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations

BACKGROUND: Combined amalgam-composite restorations have been used through many years to benefit from the advantages of both dental amalgam and composite resin. Two variations have been mentioned for this technique, this study investigated the fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth with ext...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Firouzmandi, Maryam, Doozandeh, Maryam, Jowkar, Zahra, Abbasi, Sanaz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4930635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27398176
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52726
_version_ 1782440776503918592
author Firouzmandi, Maryam
Doozandeh, Maryam
Jowkar, Zahra
Abbasi, Sanaz
author_facet Firouzmandi, Maryam
Doozandeh, Maryam
Jowkar, Zahra
Abbasi, Sanaz
author_sort Firouzmandi, Maryam
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Combined amalgam-composite restorations have been used through many years to benefit from the advantages of both dental amalgam and composite resin. Two variations have been mentioned for this technique, this study investigated the fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth with extended mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities, restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty intact extracted premolar teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups (G1-G6) of 10 teeth. G1; consisted of intact teeth and G2; consisted of teeth with MOD preparations were assigned as the positive and negative control groups respectively. Other experimental groups after MOD preparations were as follows: G3, amalgam restoration; G4, composite restoration; G5 combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement only on 1mm of the gingival floor of the proximal boxes; G6, combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement to the height of contact area of the proximal surface of the tooth. Fracture strength of the specimens was measured and the data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of significance was P<0.05. Fracture mode of the specimens was also recorded. RESULTS: G1 had the highest value of fracture resistance (1736.90 N). G2 and G3 had the lowest fracture resistance (775.70 N and 874.70 N, respectively). The difference between G 4, 5 and 6 was not statistically significant. However, G4, G5 and G6 showed significantly higher resistance to fracture compared to G2 and G3. Fracture modes were favorable in all of the study groups except in G6. CONCLUSIONS: Fracture resistance of the premolars restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restoration was similar to that achieved with composite restoration alone and more than that of amalgam restoration alone. It can be concluded that the thickness of amalgam in combined amalgam-composite restorations did not affect fracture resistance of the teeth. Key words:Amalgam, composite, fracture resistance, restoration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4930635
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49306352016-07-08 Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations Firouzmandi, Maryam Doozandeh, Maryam Jowkar, Zahra Abbasi, Sanaz J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: Combined amalgam-composite restorations have been used through many years to benefit from the advantages of both dental amalgam and composite resin. Two variations have been mentioned for this technique, this study investigated the fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth with extended mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities, restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restorations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty intact extracted premolar teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups (G1-G6) of 10 teeth. G1; consisted of intact teeth and G2; consisted of teeth with MOD preparations were assigned as the positive and negative control groups respectively. Other experimental groups after MOD preparations were as follows: G3, amalgam restoration; G4, composite restoration; G5 combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement only on 1mm of the gingival floor of the proximal boxes; G6, combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement to the height of contact area of the proximal surface of the tooth. Fracture strength of the specimens was measured and the data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of significance was P<0.05. Fracture mode of the specimens was also recorded. RESULTS: G1 had the highest value of fracture resistance (1736.90 N). G2 and G3 had the lowest fracture resistance (775.70 N and 874.70 N, respectively). The difference between G 4, 5 and 6 was not statistically significant. However, G4, G5 and G6 showed significantly higher resistance to fracture compared to G2 and G3. Fracture modes were favorable in all of the study groups except in G6. CONCLUSIONS: Fracture resistance of the premolars restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restoration was similar to that achieved with composite restoration alone and more than that of amalgam restoration alone. It can be concluded that the thickness of amalgam in combined amalgam-composite restorations did not affect fracture resistance of the teeth. Key words:Amalgam, composite, fracture resistance, restoration. Medicina Oral S.L. 2016-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4930635/ /pubmed/27398176 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52726 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Medicina Oral S.L. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Firouzmandi, Maryam
Doozandeh, Maryam
Jowkar, Zahra
Abbasi, Sanaz
Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title_full Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title_fullStr Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title_full_unstemmed Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title_short Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
title_sort effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined amalgam-composite restorations
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4930635/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27398176
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.52726
work_keys_str_mv AT firouzmandimaryam effectofcompositeamalgamthicknessonfractureresistanceofmaxillarypremolarteethrestoredwithcombinedamalgamcompositerestorations
AT doozandehmaryam effectofcompositeamalgamthicknessonfractureresistanceofmaxillarypremolarteethrestoredwithcombinedamalgamcompositerestorations
AT jowkarzahra effectofcompositeamalgamthicknessonfractureresistanceofmaxillarypremolarteethrestoredwithcombinedamalgamcompositerestorations
AT abbasisanaz effectofcompositeamalgamthicknessonfractureresistanceofmaxillarypremolarteethrestoredwithcombinedamalgamcompositerestorations