Influence of overlay restorative materials and load cusps on the fatigue resistance of endodontically treated molars

Quintessence International

Volumn 40, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 729-737

  Magne, Pascal ^a   Knezevic, Alena ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZAGREB   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Cerec; Composite resin; Endodontically treated molars; Fatigue resistance; Overlay restorations; Porcelain

Indexed keywords

ALUMINUM OXIDE; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; HYDROFLUORIC ACID; RESIN; SILANE DERIVATIVE; SILICON DIOXIDE; STAINLESS STEEL; Z100 COMPOSITE RESIN; ZIRCONIUM;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL ETCHING; DENTAL SURGERY; ENDODONTICS; HUMAN; MASTICATION; MATERIALS TESTING; MECHANICAL STRESS; METHODOLOGY; MOLAR TOOTH; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; SURVIVAL; TIME; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; TOOTH PULP DISEASE;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ALUMINUM OXIDE; BITE FORCE; COMPOSITE RESINS; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL ETCHING; DENTAL MATERIALS; DENTAL PORCELAIN; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; DENTAL RESTORATION FAILURE; HUMANS; HYDROFLUORIC ACID; INLAYS; MATERIALS TESTING; MOLAR; ROOT CANAL THERAPY; SILANES; SILICON DIOXIDE; STAINLESS STEEL; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TIME FACTORS; TOOTH PREPARATION; TOOTH, NONVITAL; ZIRCONIUM;

EID: 77955333351     PISSN: 00336572     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Robbins JW. Restoration of the endodontically treated tooth. Dent Clin North Am 2002; 46: 367-384.
2. Papa J, Cain C, Messer HH. Moisture content of vital vs endodontically treated teeth. Endod Dent Traumatol 1994; 10: 91-93.
3. Sedgley CM, Messer HH. Are endodontically treated teeth more brittle? J Endod 1992; 18: 332-335.
4. Magne P. Composite resins and bonded porcelain: The postamalgam era? J Calif Dent Assoc 2006; 34: 135-147.
5. Brunton PA, Cattell P, Burke FJT, Wilson NHF. Fracture resistance of teeth restored with onlays of three contemporary tooth-colored resin-bonded restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 176-171.
6. Kunzelmann KH, Jelen B, Mehl A, Hickel R. Wear evaluation of MZ100 compared to ceramic CAD/CAM materials. Int J Comput Dent 2001; 4: 171-184.
7. Attia A, Abdelaziz KM, Freitag S, Kern M. Fracture load of composite resin and feldspathic all-ceramic CAD/CAM crowns. J Prosthet Dent 2006; 95: 117-123.
8. Magne P, Knezevic A. Simulated fatigue resistance of composite resin vs porcelain CAD/CAM overlay restorations on endodontically treated molars. Quintessence Int 2009; 40: 125-133.
9. Kelly JR, Campbell SD, Browen HK. Fracture-surface analysis of dental ceramics. J Prosthet Dent 1989; 62: 536-541.
10. Harvey CK, Kelly JR. Contact damage as a failure mode during in vitro testing. J Prosthodont 1996; 5: 95-100.
11. Braem MJ, Davidson CL, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. In vitro flexural fatigue limits of dental composites. J Biomed Mater Res 1994; 28: 1397-1402.
12. Chen HY, Hickel R, Setcos JC, Kunzelmann KH. Effects of surface finish and fatigue testing on the fracture strength of CAD/CAM and pressed-ceramic crowns. J Prosthet Dent 1999; 82: 468-475.
13. Fennis WM, Kuijs RH, Kreulen CM, Verdonschot N, Creugers NH. Fatigue resistance of teeth restored with cuspal-coverage composite restorations. Int J Prosthodont 2004; 17: 313-317.
14. Loughran GM, Versluis A, Douglas WH. Evaluation of sub-critical fatigue crack propagation in a restorative composite. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 252-261.
15. Kuijs RH, Fennis WM, Kreulen CM, Roeters FJ, Verdonschot N, Creugers NH. A comparison of fatigue resistance of three materials for cuspreplacing adhesive restorations. J Dent 2006; 34: 19-25.
16. Al-Turki LI, Drummond JL, Agojci M, Gosz M, Tyrus JM, Lin L. Contact versus flexure fatigue of a fiberfilled composite. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 648-653.
17. Dietschi D, Magne P, Holz J. Recent trends in esthetic restorations for posterior teeth. Quintessence Int 1994; 25: 659-677.
18. Magne P, Dietschi D, Holz J. Esthetic restorations for posterior teeth: Practical and clinical considerations. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 1996; 16: 104-119.
19. Leinfelder KF. Ask the expert. Will ceramic restorations be challenged in the future? J Am Dent Assoc 2001; 132: 46-47.
20. Leinfelder KF. Indirect posterior composite resins. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2005; 26: 495-503.
21. Shortall AC, Uctasli S, Marquis PM. Fracture resistance of anterior, posterior and universal light activated composite restoratives. Oper Dent 2001; 26: 87-96.
22. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. The effect of postcuring on quantity of remaining double bonds, mechanical properties, and in vitro wear of two resin composites. J Dent 2000; 28: 447-452.
23. Waltimo A, Könönen M. A novel bite force recorder and maximal isometric bite force values for healthy young adults. Scand J Dent Res 1993; 101: 171-175.
24. Waltimo A, Könönen M. Maximal bite force and its association with signs and symptoms of craniomandibular disorders in young Finnish nonpatients. Acta Odontol Scand 1995; 53: 254-258.
25. Magne P, Belser U. Bonded Porcelain Restorations in the Anterior Dentition-A Biomimetic Approach. Chicago: Quintessence, 2002: 270-273, 358-363.
26. Magne P. Immediate dentin sealing: A fundamental procedure for indirect bonded restoration. J Esthet Restor Dent 2005; 17: 144-155.
27. Magne P, So WS, Cascione D. Immediate dentin sealing supports delayed restoration placement. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 166-174.