Interface evaluation after manual and ultrasonic insertion of standardized class I inlays using composite resin materials of different viscosity

Acta Odontologica Scandinavica

Volumn 63, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 205-212

  Schmidlin, Patrick R ^a   Zehnder, Matthias ^a   Schlup Mityko, Christina ^a   Göhring, Till N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Dental ceramics; Dental inlays; Luting agents; Ultrasound; Viscosity

Indexed keywords

BARIUM; FILLER; OXIDE; RESIN; SILICATE; SILICON; YTTERBIUM;

ARTICLE; CERAMIC PROSTHESIS; COMPOSITE MATERIAL; DENTIN; DEVICE; ENERGY DISPERSIVE SPECTROSCOPY; FILM; PARTICLE SIZE; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; SPECTROSCOPY; THICKNESS; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; ULTRASOUND; VISCOSITY;

BARIUM; CERAMICS; COMPOSITE RESINS; DENTAL CAVITY PREPARATION; DENTAL MATERIALS; ELECTRON PROBE MICROANALYSIS; HUMANS; INLAYS; MARGINAL ADAPTATION (DENTISTRY); MICROSCOPY, ELECTRON, SCANNING; SILICON; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TIME FACTORS; ULTRASONICS; VISCOSITY; YTTERBIUM;

EID: 23044492243     PISSN: 00016357     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016350510019973     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petschelt A. Technique sensitivity of dentin bonding: effect of application mistakes on bond strength and marginal adaptation. Oper Dent 2000;4:324-30.
2. Botha CT, de Wet FA. Polymerisation shrinkage around composite resin restorations: an in vitro study. J Dent Assoc S Afr 1994;49:201-7.
3. Griffiths BM, Nasaan M, Sheriff M, Watson TF. Variable polymerisation shrinkage and the interfacial micropermeability of a dentin bonding system. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:119-31.
4. Dietschi D, Scampa U, Campanile G, Holz J. Marginal adaptation and seal of direct and indirect Class II composite resin restorations: an in vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int 1995; 26:127-38.
5. Shortall AC, Baylis RL, Baylis MA, Grundy JR. Marginal seal comparisons between resin-bonded Class II porcelain inlays, posterior composite restorations, and direct composite resin inlays. Int J Prosthodont 1989;2:217-23.
6. Bindl A, Mormann WH. Clinical and SEM evaluation of all-ceramic chair-side CAD/CAM-generated partial crowns. Eur J Oral Sci 2003;111:163-9.
7. Rosentritt M, Behr M, Lang R, Handel G. Influence of cement type on the marginal adaptation of all-ceramic MOD inlays. Dent Mater 2004;20:463-9.
8. Roulet JF. Longevity of glass ceramic inlays and amalgam: results up to 6 years. Clin Oral Investig 1997;1:40-6.
9. Eppenberger J, Marinello CP, Scherle W, Schärer P. Composites as adhesive cements? Initial clinical experiences in crown and bridge prosthetics. Zahntechnik 1987; 45:454-60.
10. Schaffer H, Dumfahrt H, Gausch K. Surface structures and substance loss during the etching of ceramic materials. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 1989;99:530-43.
11. Friedl KH, Hiller KA, Schmalz G, Bey B. Clinical and quantitative marginal analysis of feldspathic ceramic inlays at 4 years. Clin Oral Investig 1997;1:163-8.
12. Kramer N, Lohbauer U, Frankenberger R. Adhesive luting of indirect restorations. Am J Dent 2000;13:60D-76.
13. Sjogren G. Marginal and internal fit of four different types of ceramic inlays after luting. An in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1995;53:24-8.
14. Braem M, Finger W, van Doren VE, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Mechanical properties and filler fraction of dental composites. Dent Mater 1989;5:346-8.
15. Torii Y, Itou K, Otota T, Hama K, Konishi N, Nagamine M, Inoue K. Influence of filler content and gap dimension on wear resistance of resin composite luting cements around a CAD/CAM ceramic inlay restoration. Dent Mater J 1999;18:453-61.
16. Sorensen JA, Choi C, Franuscu MI, Mito WT. IPS Empress crown system: three-year clinical trial results. J Calif Dent Assoc 1998;26:130-6.
17. Peutzfeldt A. Effect of the ultrasonic insertion technique on the seating of composite inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 1994; 52:51-4.
18. Noack M, Roulet JF, Bergmann P. A new method to lute tooth colored inlays with highly filled composite resins. J Dent Res 1992;15:457.
19. Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ. Applying composite luting agent ultrasonically: a successful alternative. J Am Dent Assoc 1995;126:1125-9.
20. Brunthaler A, König F, Lucas T, Sperr W, Schedle A. Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7:63-70.
21. Manhart J, Hickel R. Longevity of restorations. In: Roulet JF, Wilson NHF, Fuzzi M, editors. Advances in operative dentistry. Volume 2: Challenges of the future. Illinois: Quintessence Publishing; 2001. p 237-305.
22. Hickel R, Manhart J, Garcia-Godoy F. Clinical results and new developments of direct posterior restorations. Am J Dent 2000;13:41D-54.
23. Gohring TN, Besek MJ, Schmidlin PR. Attritional wear and abrasive surface alterations of composite resin materials in vitro. J Dent 2002;30:119-27.
24. Bergenholtz G, Cox CF, Loesche WJ, Syed SA. Bacterial leakage around dental restorations: its effect on the dental pulp. J Oral Pathol 1982;11:439-50.
25. Bouillaguet S, Duroux B, Ciucchi B, Sano H. Ability of adhesive systems to seal dentin surfaces: an in vitro study. J Adhes Dent 2000;2:201-8.
26. Sjogren G, Hedlund SO. Filler content and gap width after luting of ceramic inlays, using the ultrasonic insertion technique and composite resin cements. An in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1997;55:403-7.
27. Kawai K, Isenberg BP, Leinfelder KF. Effect of gap dimension on composite resin cement wear. Quintessence Int 1994; 25:53-8.
28. Baharav, H, Laufer BZ, Pilo R, Cardash HS. Effect of glaze-thickness on the fracture toughness and hardness of alumina-reinforced porcelain. J Prosthet Dent 1999;81:515-9.
29. Pallis K, Griggs JA, Woody RD, Guillen GE, Miller AW. Fracture resistance of three all-ceramic restorative systems for posterior applications. J Prosthet Dent 2004; 91:561-9.