Effect of lining with a flowable composite on internal adaptation of direct composite restorations using all-in-one adhesive systems

Yahagi, Chika; Takagaki, Tomohiro; Sadr, Alireza; Ikeda, Masaomi; Nikaido, Toru; Tagami, Junji

doi:10.4012/dmj.2012-007

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…5 It can replace the solvent and keep the less-miscible dimethacrylate monomers in solution, whereas the water molecules in a hydrophilic adhesive remain hydrogen-bonded to the HEMA monomers. 21 Nevertheless, void formation by the increment on hydrophilicity and HEMA presence has frequently been discussed. 7 Optibond AllIn-One has two solvents, ethanol and acetone, with different vapor pressures, which also might increase the void formation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared the microleakage of class V restorations bonded with various one-step self-etching adhesives. Seventy class V resin-based composite restorations were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 35 premolars, by using: Clearfil S 3 Bond, G-Bond, iBond, One Coat 7.0, OptiBond All-In-One, or Xeno IV. The Adper Single Bond etch-and-rinse two-step adhesive was employed as a control. Specimens were thermocycled for 500 cycles in separate water baths at 5°C and 55°C and loaded under 40 to 70 N for 50,000 cycles. Marginal microleakage was measured based on the penetration of a tracer agent. Although the control showed no microleakage at the enamel margins, there were no differences between groups (p = 0.06). None of the adhesives avoided microleakage at the dentin margins, and they displayed similar performances (p = 0.76). When both margins were compared, iBond  presented higher microleakage (p < 0.05) at the enamel margins (median, 1.00; Q 3 -Q 1 , 1.25-0.00) compared to the dentin margins (median, 0.00; Q 3 -Q 1 , 0.25-0.00). The study adhesives showed similar abilities to seal the margins of class V restorations, except for iBond  , which presented lower performance at the enamel margin.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Placing the restoration in an incremental technique is a common clinical approach to minimize the contraction stress associated with C-factor. Furthermore, applying a flowable composite lining underneath the main filling could be effective in reducing shrinkage stress [55].…”

Section: Factors Affecting Mechanical Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is clearly seen that the E values of our reinforced composite samples are comparable to that of human dentin. Furthermore, applying a flowable composite lining underneath the main filling could be effective in reducing shrinkage stress [55]. The lower elastic moduli and the higher flowability of composites might allow stress concentration relaxation and possible reduction of marginal breakdown and debonding [56].…”

Section: Dynamic Young's Modulus (E)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinforcement of flowable dental composites with titanium dioxide nanotubes

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Group B cavities were completely coated with the separating silane coupling agent to minimize adherence between the whole cavity and the resin composite (i.e., to exclude binding forces). Group C samples had the adhesive agent applied on the side wall of the cavity, and the separating agent applied on the cavity floor to simulate the results of recent adhesive tests 7,28,29) : the adhesive agent on the side wall -which in a tooth includes the mainly mineral enamelpolymerized early and adhered well. The separating agent at the cavity floor -which in a tooth consists of dentine, including many organic matters-polymerized slowly owing to its distance from the light source and adhered poorly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional X-ray micro-computed tomography analysis of polymerization shrinkage vectors in flowable composite

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The polymerization shrinkage of flowable resin composites was evaluated using air bubbles as traceable markers. Three different surface treatments i.e. an adhesive silane coupling agent, a separating silane coupling agent, and a combination of both, were applied to standard cavities. Before and after polymerization, X-ray micro-computed tomography images were recorded. Their superimposition and comparison allowed position changes of the markers to be visualized as vectors. The movement of the markers in the resin composite was, therefore, quantitatively evaluated from the tomographic images. Adhesion was found to significantly influence shrinkage patterns. The method used here could be employed to visualize shrinkage vectors and shrinkage volume.

show abstract

Effect of lining with a flowable composite on internal adaptation of direct composite restorations using all-in-one adhesive systems

Cited by 22 publications

References 26 publications

Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems

Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems

Reinforcement of flowable dental composites with titanium dioxide nanotubes

Three-dimensional X-ray micro-computed tomography analysis of polymerization shrinkage vectors in flowable composite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About