The use of different adhesive filling material and mass combinations to restore class II cavities under loading and shrinkage effects: a 3D-FEA

Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2021 Apr;24(5):485-495. doi: 10.1080/10255842.2020.1836168. Epub 2020 Oct 22.

Abstract

3D tooth models were virtually restored: flowable composite resin + bulk-fill composite (A), glass ionomer cement + bulk-fill composite (B) or adhesive + bulk-fill composite (C). Polymerization shrinkage and masticatory loads were simulated. All models exhibited the highest stress concentration at the enamel-restoration interfaces. A and C showed similar pattern with lower magnitude in A in comparison to C. B showed lower stress in dentine and C the highest cusps displacement. The use of glass ionomer cement or flowable composite resin in combination with a bulk-fill composite improved the biomechanical behavior of deep class II MO cavities.

Keywords: Adhesion; class II MO; loading; operative dentistry; polymerization shrinkage.

MeSH terms

  • Adhesives / pharmacology*
  • Composite Resins / pharmacology
  • Dental Pulp Cavity / drug effects*
  • Dental Restoration Repair
  • Dental Stress Analysis
  • Elastic Modulus / drug effects
  • Finite Element Analysis*
  • Glass Ionomer Cements / pharmacology
  • Humans
  • Materials Testing
  • Models, Anatomic
  • Polymerization
  • Root Canal Filling Materials / pharmacology*
  • Weight-Bearing

Substances

  • Adhesives
  • Composite Resins
  • Glass Ionomer Cements
  • Root Canal Filling Materials
  • flowable hybrid composite