The Influence of Antagonist Standardization on Wear

Journal of Dental Research

Volumn 78, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 713-719

  Krejci, I ^a,b   Albert, P ^a   Lutz, F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Antagonist standardization; Enamel; In vitro test; Steatite; Wear

Indexed keywords

MAGNESIUM OXIDE; RESIN; SILICON DIOXIDE; STEATITE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; DENTAL SURGERY; ENAMEL; HARDNESS; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MASTICATION; MATERIALS TESTING; PHYSIOLOGY; STANDARD; TOOTH CROWN; TOOTH PROSTHESIS;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BITE FORCE; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL PORCELAIN; DENTAL RESTORATION WEAR; HARDNESS TESTS; HUMANS; MAGNESIUM OXIDE; MASTICATION; MATERIALS TESTING; REFERENCE STANDARDS; SILICON DIOXIDE; TOOTH CROWN;

EID: 0033278188     PISSN: 00220345     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/00220345990780021201     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Björn H, Lindhe J (1966). On the mechanics of toothbrushing. Odontol Revy 17:916.
2. De Gee AJ, Pallav P, Davidson CL (1986). Effect of abrasion medium on wear of stress-bearing composites and amalgam in vitro. J Dent Res 65:654-658.
3. DeLong R, Douglas WH (1983). Development of an artificial oral environment for the testing of dental restoratives: bi-axial force and movement control. J Dent Res 62:32-36.
4. Fang H, Kunzelmann K-H, Hickel R, Petchelt A (1993). Standardisierung des Antagonisten bei 2-KörperAbriebsimulatoren. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 48:481-483.
5. Finger W, Thiemann J (1987). Correlation between in vitro and in vivo wear of posterior restorative materials. Dent Mater 3:280-286.
6. Krejci I (1992). Zahnfarbene Restaurationen. Munich: Hanser Verlag.
7. Krejci I, Reich T, Lutz F, Albertoni M (1990). In-vitro-Testverfahren zur Evaluation dentaler Restaurations systeme. 1. Computergesteuerter Kausimulator [An in vitro test procedure for evaluating dental restoration systems. 1. A computer-controlled mastication simulator.] [in German]. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 100:953-960.
8. Krejci I, Lutz F, Zedler C (1992). Effect of contact area size on enamel and composite wear. J Dent Res 71:1413-1416.
9. Krejci I, Lutz F, Reimer M, Heinzmann JL (1993). Wear of ceramic inlays, their enamel antagonists, and luting cements. J Prosthet Dent 69:425-430.
10. Krejci I, Gautschi L, Lutz F (1994). Wear and marginal adaptation of composite resin inlays. J Prosthet Dent 72:233-244.
11. Lutz F, Krejci I, Barbakow F (1992). Chewing pressure versus wear of composites and opposing enamel cusps. J Dent Res 71:1525-1529.
12. Lambrechts P (1983). Basic properties of dental composites and their impact on clinical performance (thesis). Leuven, Belgium: Catholic University of Leuven.
13. Lehmann KM, Helhvig E (1993). Einführung in die restaurative Zahnheilkunde. Munich: Urban & Schwarzenberg.
14. Radlanski RJ (1997). Morphogenetic and morphological aspects of prism structure in human dental enamel. Ada Med Dent Helv 2:86-95.
15. Rice SL, Bailey WF, Pacelli PF 3rd, Blanck WR (1982). Influence of enamel stylus stiffness on the sliding wear behavior of a composite restorative. J Dent Res 61:493-496.
16. Roulet J-F (1987). Degradation of dental polymers. Basel: Karger.
17. Schroeder HE (1992). Orale Strukturbiologie. 4th rev. ed. Stuttgart: Thieme.
18. Wassel RW, Walls AWG, McCabe JF (1991). Frictional wear test (abstract). J Dent Res 70(Spec Iss):479.
19. Willems G (1992). Multi standard criteria for the selection of potential posterior composites (thesis). Leuven, Belgium: Catholic Univesity of Leuven.