Support of Occlusal Enamel Provided by Bonded Restorations

Operative Dentistry

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 49-53

  Grisanti, L P ^a   Troendle, K B ^a   Summitt, J B ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^b Mail Code 7890 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; FILTEK Z250; FUJI II LC CEMENT; FUJI IX; GLASS IONOMER; RESIN; RESIN CEMENT; SCOTCHBOND MULTI PURPOSE; SCOTCHBOND MULTI-PURPOSE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CEMENTATION; CHEMICAL BOND; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPOSITE MATERIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL SURGERY; DENTIN; ENAMEL; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IN VITRO STUDY; MECHANICAL STRESS; MOLAR TOOTH; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; REPARATIVE DENTISTRY; TEMPERATURE; THERMAL EXPOSURE; TOOTH COLOR; TOOTH EXTRACTION; TOOTH FILLING; TOOTH FRACTURE;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL ENAMEL; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL RESTORATION, PERMANENT; DENTIN; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; RESIN CEMENTS; RESINS, SYNTHETIC; STRESS, MECHANICAL; TEMPERATURE; TOOTH FRACTURES;

EID: 1642479188     PISSN: 03617734     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Ausiello P, de Gee AJ, Rengo S & Davidson CL (1997) Fracture resistance of endodontically-treated premolars adhesively restored American Journal of Dentistry 10(5) 237-241.
2. Boyer DB & Roth L (1994) Fracture resistance of teeth with bonded amalgams American Journal of Dentistry 7(2) 91-94.
3. Donly KJ, Wild T & Jensen ME (1988) Cuspal reinforcement in primary teeth: An in vitro comparison of three restorative materials Pediatric Dentistry 10(2) 102-104.
4. Eakle WS (1985) Increasing the resistance of teeth to fracture: Bonded composite resin versus glass ionomer cement Dental Materials 1(6) 229-230.
5. Eakle WS (1986) Increased fracture resistance of teeth: Comparison of five bonded composite resin systems Quintessence International 17(1) 17-20.
6. th ed, St Louis, Mosby, p 47.
7. Hill FJ & Halaseh FJ (1988) A laboratory investigation of tunnel restorations in premolar teeth British Dental Journal 165(10) 364-367.
8. nd ed, Chicago Quintessence p 275.
9. Jagadish S & Yogesh BG (1990) Fracture resistance of teeth with Class 2 silver amalgam, posterior composite, and glass cermet restorations Operative Dentistry 15(2) 42-47.
10. Joynt RB, Wieczkowski G Jr, Klockowski R & Davis EL (1987) Effects of composite restorations on resistance to cuspal fracture in posterior teeth The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 57(4) 431-435.
11. Latino CJ, Troendle KB & Summitt JB (2001) Support of undermined occlusal enamel provided by restorative materials Quintessence International 32(4) 287-291.
12. Oliveira F deC, Denehy GE & Boyer DB (1987) Fracture resistance of endodontically prepared teeth using various restorative materials Journal of the American Dental Association 115(1) 57-60.
13. Reel DC & Mitchell RJ (1989) Fracture resistance of teeth restored with Class II composite restorations The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 61(2) 177-180.
14. th ed St Louis Mosby p 272.
15. Wendt SL Jr, Harris BM & Hunt TE (1987) Resistance to cusp fracture in endodontically treated teeth Dental Materials 3(5) 232-235.
16. Wilson AD (1991) Glass-ionomer cement-origins, development and future Clinical Materials 7(4) 275-282.