+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in Class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine

Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in Class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine

Journal of Dentistry 27(2): 119-128

The aim of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of direct Class II sandwich restorations with resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and compomers in comparison to base and total bond restorations. For sandwich restorations with a triple cure resin-modified glass-ionomer cement the influence of different light curing techniques was also evaluated. Large butt-joint class II cavities with cervical margins 1 mm below the cemento-enamel junction were cut into 120 extracted human molars. The cavities (15 groups, n = 8) were filled using a sandwich, base or total bond technique with materials from five different manufacturers. A three-sited light curing technique was used in 13 groups. For the material combination Vitremer/Z100 two additional groups with a different wand positioning and a metal matrix were evaluated. After water storage for 21 days and thermocycling (2000x, 5-55 degrees C), replicas were quantitatively analysed in the SEM. Statistical analysis was performed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and the Bonferroni test at p < 0.05. The marginal adaptation of vertical enamel margins was not dependent on the restorative technique. For margins in dentine, marginal adaptation was significantly better with the sandwich technique than with a base or total bond technique for all materials. There were no significant differences between the base and total bond technique. Overall, resin-modified glass-ionomer cements showed somewhat better results than compomers in sandwich restorations, though differences were not significant for some criteria. Vitremer/Z100 sandwich restorations applied with a metal matrix showed the highest mean percentage of excellent margins of all experimental groups. Both resin-modified glass-ionomer cements and compomers can improve the marginal quality when used in a sandwich technique. Further research is necessary to determine the ideal material combination for sandwich restorations.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 046623064

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 10071469

Related references

Marginal integrity of large compomer Class II restorations with cervical margins in dentine. Journal of Dentistry 28(6): 399-405, 2000

Flowable materials as an intermediate layer could improve the marginal and internal adaptation of composite restorations in Class-V-cavities. Dental Materials 22(3): 250-257, 2005

Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations. Operative Dentistry 22(1): 21-29, 1997

Marginal adaptation of direct class II composite restorations with different cavity liners. Operative Dentistry 38(6): E210-E220, 2015

Marginal adaptation and seal of direct and indirect Class II composite resin restorations: an in vitro evaluation. Quintessence International 26(2): 127-138, 1995

In Vitro Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation of Direct Class II Composite Restorations Made of Different "Low-Shrinkage" Systems. Operative Dentistry 42(3): 273-283, 2018

Clinical performance and marginal adaptation of class II direct and semidirect composite restorations over 3.5 years in vivo. Journal of Dentistry 33(6): 499-507, 2005

In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation after occlusal stressing of indirect class II composite restorations with different resinous bases and interface treatments. "Post-fatigue adaptation of indirect composite restorations". Clinical Oral Investigations 16(5): 1385-1393, 2015

Effect of cyclic loading on marginal adaptation and bond strength in direct vs. indirect class II MO composite restorations. Operative Dentistry 33(5): 587-592, 2008

Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations. Operative Dentistry 32(5): 515-523, 2007

Effect of flowable composite liner and glass ionomer liner on class II gingival marginal adaptation of direct composite restorations with different bonding strategies. Journal of Dentistry 42(5): 619-625, 2016

Effect of prepolymerized composite megafiller on the marginal adaptation of composite restorations in cavities with different C-factors: an SEM study. Indian Journal of Dental Research 21(4): 500-505, 2011

The influence of resin composite and bonded amalgam restorations on dentine permeability in Class II cavities in vitro. Dental Materials 17(6): 477-484, 2001

Marginal seal of Class V composite/glass ionomer sandwich restorations. Restorative Dentistry 4(4): 80-1, 83-5, 87, 1988

Correlation between marginal adaptation of composite resin restorations and bacterial growth in cavities. Scandinavian Journal of Dental Research 88(4): 296-300, 1980