Interfacial adaptation of a Class II polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite laminate restoration in vivo

References

• Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent 1997;25:435–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidsson CL, Abdalla Al. Effect of occlusal load cycling on the marginal integrity of adhesive Class V restorations. Am J Dent 1994;7:111–4.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brännström M. Communication between the oral cavity and the dental pulp associated with restorative treatment. Operative Dent 1984;9:57–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietschi D, Scampa V, Campanile G, Holz J. Marginal adaptation and seal of direct and indirect Class II composite resin restorations: an in vitro investigation. Quintessence Int 1995;26:127–38.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dijken van JWV, Hörstedt P. Marginal breakdown of 5-year-old direct composite inlays. J Dent 1996;24:389–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dijken van JVVV. A 6-year evaluation of a direct composite resin inlay/onlay system and glass ionomer cement-composite resin sandwich restorations. Acta Odontol Scand 1994;52:368–76.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rasmusson CG, Lundin SA. Class II restorations in six different posterior composite resins: five-year results. Swed Dent J 1995; 19:173–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Geurtsen W, Schoeler U. A 4-year retrospective clinical study of class I and class II composite restorations. J Dent 1997;25:229–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrari M, Davidson CL. Sealing performance of Scotchbond Multi Purpose-Z100 in Class II restorations. Am J Dent 1996;9: 145–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perdigao J. An ultra-morphological study of human dentine exposed to adhesive systems. PhD thesis. Van der Poorten, Leuven, Belgium, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Kempe-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Complete marginal seal of class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res 1990;69:1434–42.
   Google Scholar
• Van Meerbeek B, Perdigão J, Lambrechts P, VanHerle G. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent 1998;26:1–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Attin T, Vataschki M, Hellwig E. Properties of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials and two polyacid-modified resin composite materials. Quintessence Int 1996;27:203–9.
   Google Scholar
• Friedl K-H, Schmalz G, Hiller K-A. Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sand-wich restorations. Operative Dent 1997;22:21–9.
   Google Scholar
• Bindi G. Evaluation of the marginal adaptation of stratified compomer-composite class II restorations following an in vitro fatigue test. PhD thesis. University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzer-land 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Hannig M, Bot B, Höhnk H-D, Mühlbauer EA. CbC new concept for tooth-colored Class II restorations with proximal margins located in dentin. J Dent Res 1997;76:314, Abstract No. 2403.
   Google Scholar
• Gwinnett AJ, Kanca J. Micromorphological relationship between resin and dentin in vivo and in vitro. Am J Dent 1992;5:19–23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dijken van JVW, Hörstedt P. In vivo adaptation of restorative materials to dentin. J Prosthet Dent 1986;56:677–81.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dijken van JWV, Hörstedt P, Waern R. Directed polymerization shrinkage versus a horizontal incremental filling technique. Interfacial adaptation in vivo in class II cavities. Am J Dent 1998;11:165–72.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel S. Nonparametric statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1956.
   Google Scholar
• Sjödin L, Uusitalo M, van Dijken JWV. Resin modified glass ionomer cements. In vitro microleakage in class II sandwich- and direct class V fillings. Swed Dent J 1996;20:77–86.
   Google Scholar
• Dijken van JVVV. Multiple versus one-bottle bonding systems. Réalités Cliniques 1999;10:199–222.
   Google Scholar
• Dijken van JVVV, Hörstedt P. Effect of the use of rubberdam on marginal adaptation of composite fillings placed with the acid etch technique. Acta Odontol Scand 1987;45:303–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dietschi D, Herzfeld D. In vitro evaluation of marginal and internal adaptation of class II resin composite restorations after thermal and occlusal stressing. Eur J Oral Sci 1998;106:1033–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lutz F, Kull M. The development of a posterior tooth composite system, an in vitro investigation. Schweiz Mschr Zahnheilk 1980; 90:455–83.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fusayama T. Indications for self-cured and light-cured adhesive composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:46–51.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tjan AH, Bergh BH, Lidner C. Effect of various incremental techniques on the marginal adaptation of class II composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:62–6.
   Google Scholar
• Dijken van JWV, Kieri C, Carlén M. Longevity of extensive Class II open sandwich restorations with a resin-modified GIC-comp osite. J Dent Res 1999;8:1319–25.
   Google Scholar
• Knibbs P. The clinical performance of a glass polyalkenoat (glass ionomer) cement used in a "sandwich" technique with a composite resin to restore class II cavities. Br Dent J 1992;172: 102–7.
   Google Scholar
• Dietrich Th, Lösche AC, Lösche GM, Roulet J-F. Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in class II cavities with cervical margins in dentine. J Dent 1999;27:119–28.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Welbury RR, Murray jj. A clinical trial of the glass ionomer cement-composite resin "sandwich" technique in class II cavities in permanent premolar and molar teeth. Quintessence Int 1990; 21:507–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dijken van JVVV. Longevity of new hybrid restorative materials in Class III cavities. Eur J Oral Sci 1999;107:115–9.
   Google Scholar
• Ericson D, Dérand T. Reduction of cervical gaps in class II composite resin restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1991;65:33–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziskind D, Venezia E, Mass E, Hirschfeld Z. The effect of composite resin application and radiation techniques on dye penetration in class II direct composite resin restorations. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:254•8.
   Google Scholar
• Eick JD, Robinson SJ, Chappell RP, Cobb CM, Spencer P. The dentinal surface: its influence on dentinal adhesion. Part III. Quintessence Int 1993;24:571•82.
   Google Scholar
• Hannig M, Bot B, Emmermann A. Randschlu�verhalten von Klass-II-komposit-fu� llungen nach schmelzkonditionering mit selbsta� tzenden primern. Dtsch Zahna� rztl Z 1999;54:133•6.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson Wenckert I, van Dijken JWV, Ho� rstedt P. Interfacial adaptation of in vivo aged polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) restorations in primary molars. A SEM evaluation. Clin Oral Invest 1998;2:184•90.
   Google Scholar
• Dijken van JWV, Ho� rstedt P. In vivo enamel adaptation of a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) and a resinmodified glass ionomer cement. Clin Oral Invest 1997;1:185•90.
   Google Scholar
• Abate PF, Bertacchini M, Polack MA, Macchi RL. Adhesion of a compomer to dental structures. Quintessence Int 1997;28:509� 12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Attin T, Buchalla W, Hellwig E. Influence of enamel conditioning on bond strength of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative materials and polyacid-modified composites. J Prosthet Dent 1996;76:29•33.
   Google Scholar