Evaluation of stress distribution of a new restorative material and composite resin: a finite-element analysis study

References

• Zainuddin N, Karpukhina N, Law RV, et al. Characterisation of a remineralising glass carbomer® ionomer cement by MAS-NMR spectroscopy. Dent Mater. 2012;28(10):1051–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ngo HC, Mount G, Mc Intyre J, et al. Chemical exchange between glass-ionomer restorations and residual carious dentine in permanent molars: an in vivo study. J Dent. 2006;34(8):608–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorseta K, Borzabadi-Farahani A, Moshaverinia A, et al. Effect of different thermo-light polymerization on flexural strength of two glass ionomer cements and a glass carbomer cement. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;118(1):102–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotsanos N1, Topitsoglou V, Tatsi C, et al. The early fluoride release pattern of an aged glass ionomer treated with fluoride. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2007;15:135–141.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davidovich E, Weiss E, Fuks AB, et al. Surface antibacterial properties of glass ionomer cements used in atraumatic restorative treatment. J Am Dent Assoc. 2007;138:1347–1352.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutar J, McAllan L, Tyas MJ. Three-year clinical performance of glass ionomer cement in primary molars. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2002;12:146–147.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dionysopoulos P, Kotsanos N, Pataridou A. Fluoride release and uptake by four new fluoride releasing restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil. 2003;30:866–872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen X, Du MQ, Fan MW, et al. Caries-preventive effect of sealants produced with altered glass-ionomer materials, after 2 years. Dent Mater. 2012;28:554–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menne-Happ U, Ilie N. Effect of gloss and heat on the mechanical behaviour of a glass carbomer cement. J Dent. 2013;41(3):223–230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shor A, Nicholls JI, Phillips KM, et al. Fatigue load of teeth restored with bonded direct composite and indirect ceramic inlays in MOD class II cavity preparations. Int J Prosthodont. 2003;16:64–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ausiello P, Rengo S, Davidson CL, et al. Stress distributions in adhesively cemented ceramic and resin-composite Class II inlay restorations: a 3D-FEA study. Dent Mater. 2004;20:862–872.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamanel K, Caglar A, Gülsahi K, et al. Effects of different ceramic and composite materials on stress distribution in inlay and onlay cavities: 3-D finite element analysis. Dent Mater J. 2009;28(6):661–670.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roylance D. Finite Element Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2001. Available from: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materials-science-and-engineering/3-11-mechanics-of-materials-fall-1999/modules/MIT3_11F99_fea.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Guven S, Akdogan M, Oz C, et al. Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of two ceramic inlay restorations with different cavity designs. Biotechnol Biotechnol Equip. 2015;29(3):579–585.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahrami B, Shahrbaf S, Mirzakouchaki B, et al. Effect of surface treatment on stress distribution in immediately loaded dental implants – a 3D finite element analysis. Dent Mater. 2014;30(4):89–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ash MM, Nelson N. Wheeler's dental anatomy, physiology, and occlusion. 8th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Saunders; 2002. p. 297–306.
   Google Scholar
• Yokoyama D, Shinya A, Gomi H, et al. Effects of mechanical properties of adhesive resin cements on stress distribution in fiber-reinforced composite adhesive fixed partial dentures. Dent Mater J. 2012;31(2):189–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldman AS, Chen X, Fan M, et al. Cost-effectiveness, in a randomized trial, of glass-ionomer-based and resin sealant materials after 4 yr. Eur J Oral Sci. 2016;124:472–479.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Subramaniam P, Girish BKL, Jayasurya S. Evaluation of solubility and microleakage of glass carbomer sealant. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2015;39(5):429–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorseta K, Glavina D, Borzabadi-Farahani A, et al. One year clinical evaluation of a glass carbomer fissure sealant: a preliminary study. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2014;22(2):67–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Koenraads H, Van der Kroon G, Frencken JE. Compressive strength of two newly developed glass ionomer materials for use with the atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) approach in class II cavities. Dent Mater. 2009;25(4):551–556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and contraction stress of dental resin composites. Dent Mater. 2005;21(12):1150–1157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derchi G, Vano M, Barone A, et al. Bacterial adhesion on direct and indirect dental restorative composite resins: an in vitro study on a natural biofilm. J Prosthet Dent. 2017;117(5):669–676.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes GC, Baratieri LN, Monteiro S Jr, et al. Effect of posterior resin composite placement technique on the resin-dentin interface formed in vivo. Quintessence Int. 2004;35:156–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson VS, Amjad S, Fransson H. Endodontic complications in teeth with vital pulps restored with composite resins: a systematic review. Int Endod J. 2015;48:627–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheibenbogen-Fuchsbrunner A, Manhart J, Kremers L, et al. Two-year clinical evaluation of direct and indirect composite restorations in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:391–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvanforoush N, Palamara J, Wong RH, et al. A Comparison between published clinical success of direct resin composite restorations in vital posterior teeth in 1995–2005 and 2006–2016 periods. Aust Dent J. 2017;62(2):132–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dijken JWV. Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent. 2000;28:299–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barabanti N, Preti A, Vano M, et al. Indirect composite restorations luted with two different procedures: a ten years follow up clinical trial. J Clin Exp Dent. 2015;7(1):54–59.
   Google Scholar
• Tezvergil-Mutluay A, Lassila LVJ, Vallittu PK. Degree of conversion of dual cure luting resins light-polymerized through various materials. Acta Odontol Scand. 2007;65:201–215.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dauvillier BS. Visco-elastic parameters of dental restorative materials during setting. J Dent Res. 2000;79:818–823.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srirekha A, Bashetty K. A comparative analysis of restorative materials used in abfraction lesions in tooth with and without occlusal restoration: three-dimensional finite element analysis. J Conserv Dent. 2013;16(2):157–161.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barone A, Derchi G, Rossi A, et al. Longitudinal clinical evaluation of bonded composite inlays: a 3-year study. Quintessence Int. 2008;39(1):65–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cetin AR, Unlu N, Cobanoglu N. A five-year clinical evaluation of direct nanofilled and indirect composite resin restorations in posterior teeth. Oper Dent. 2013;38(2):31–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendonça JS, Neto RG, Santiago SL, et al. Direct resin composite restorations versus indirect composite inlays: one-year results. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2010;11(3):25–32.
   Google Scholar
• Eng DS, Lee JM, Gebremariam A, et al. Bisphenol A and chronic disease risk factors in US children. Pediatrics. 2013;132(3):637–645.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar