Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with glass ionomer-composite resin systems.
This study compared the fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with one of four composite resin systems or amalgam. Mesio-occlusodistal cavity preparations were placed in 50 maxillary premolars. Dimensions of the preparation were such that remaining tooth structure was weakened. Five groups of 10 specimens each were designated as follows: I, amalgam; II, Ketac-Bond glass-ionomer base; III, Ketac-Silver glass-ionomer base; IV, GC lining cement glass-ionomer base; and V, Tenure dentinal bonding agent. Specimens in groups II through V were restored with P-30 posterior composite resin. Testing was accomplished by applying an occlusal load to the point of failure for each specimen. Results indicated no significant difference among restorative systems in resistance to cuspal fracture. These findings suggest that neither Tenure nor glass-ionomer cement used in conjunction with posterior composite resin strengthen weakened cusps to any greater extent than does amalgam.
Joynt
R B
RB
State University of New York, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo.
Davis
E L
EL
Wieczkowski
G
G
Williams
D A
DA
D001641:Bicuspid; D003188:Composite Resins; D003738:Dental Cements; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D006801:Humans; D014082:Tooth Fractures / Q000517:prevention & control*
D003188:Composite Resins; D003738:Dental Cements; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements