Cavity wall adaptation of resin-based composites lined with flowable composites

American Journal of Dentistry

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 192-194

  Estafan, Denise ^a   Estafan, Ashraf ^b   Leinfelder, Karl F ^c  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACRYLIC ACID RESIN; ALERT COMPOSITE RESIN; BOND 1 ADHESIVE; BOND-1 ADHESIVE; COMPOSITE DENTAL RESIN; DENTIN BONDING AGENT; DENTIN BONDING AGENTS; FLOWABLE HYBRID COMPOSITE; METHACRYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; POLYURETHAN; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT; SYNTAC DENTINE ADHESIVE;

ARTICLE; CEMENTATION; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; DENTIN; ENAMEL; ENDODONTICS; HUMAN; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SURFACE PROPERTY; THERMODYNAMICS; TOOTH DISEASE; ULTRASTRUCTURE; VISCOSITY;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ACRYLIC RESINS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL LEAKAGE; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTIN; DENTIN-BONDING AGENTS; HUMAN; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); METHACRYLATES; MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; POLYURETHANES; RESIN CEMENTS; STATISTICS; SURFACE PROPERTIES; THERMODYNAMICS; VISCOSITY;

EID: 0034252969     PISSN: 08948275     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Buonocore MG. A simple method of increasing the adhesion of acrylic filling materials to enamel surfaces. J Dent Res 1955; 34:849-853.
2. Bowen RL, Rodriguez M. Tensile strength and modulus of elasticity of tooth structure and several restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;64:378-387.
3. Leinfelder KF. Using composite resin as a posterior restorative material. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122:65-70.
4. Bouschlicher MR, Cobb DS, Boyer DB. Radiopacity of compomers, flowable and conventional resin composites for posterior restorations. Oper Dent 1999;24:20-25.
5. Leinfelder KF. Posterior composite resins: the materials and their clinical performance. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:663-664.
6. Christensen GJ. Amalgam vs. composite resin. J Am Dent Assoc 1998; 128: 1757-1759.
7. Christensen GJ. Tooth sensitivity related to class I and II resin restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1996;127:497-498.
8. Christensen GJ. Preventing sensitivity in Class II composite resin restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1998;129:1469-1470.
9. Christensen GJ. Overcoming challenges with resin in class II situations. J Am Dent Assoc 1997;128:1579-1580.
10. Elck D, Fen HW. Polymerization shrinkage of posterior composite resins and its possible influence on postoperative sensitivity. Quintessence Int 1986;17:103-111.
11. Sturdevant CM, Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR. et al. The art and science of operative dentistry. 3rd Ed. St. Louis: Mosby Yearbook Inc., 1995; 586-625.
12. Ferdianakis K. Microleakage reduction from newer esthetic restorative materials in permanent molars. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1998; 22;3:221-229.
13. Payne JH. The marginal seal of class II restorations: Flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999; 23:123-130.
14. Miranda WG Jr, MF Nunes, PEC Cardoso, JFF Santos et al. Microleakage of condensable composite resins combined with a flowable composite. J Dent Res 1999;78:306 (Abstr 1603).
15. Russell, RR and Mazer, RB. Should flowable composites be used as liners for Class II restorations? J Dent Res 1999; 78:389 (Abstr 2266).