• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2001.11a
• /
• pp.595-595
• /
• 2001

As the interest for esthetic restoration is increasing, the usage of composite resin is increasing. The usage of composite resin is not limited to anterior teeth but is spreading to posterior area using direct ＆ indirect methods. Generally, dual or chemical cure resin cement has been used for setting composite or porcelain inlay restoration. However, chemical cure resin cement has limited working time and it's difficult to remove excess cement from the tooth and the restoration. The dual cured composite is also difficult to remove from the tooth surface.(omitted)

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.50 no.7
• /
• pp.368-376
• /
• 2012

The demand for tooth-colored restorations has grown considerably during the last decade. Posterior composite restorations have risen in popularity as a result of the development of improved resin composites, bonding systems and operating techniques. A major limitation of direct composite restoration is the difficulty of controlling the polymerization shrinkage. To overcome this limitation, the indirect fabrication of a composite restoration and cementation with resin cement has been advocated. Unfortunately, the current available resin cements with indirect restorations do not always bond to dentin as strongly as dentin adhesive systems bond with direct resin composite restorations. Several procedural strategies have been proposed for indirect composite restoration. In this regard, the rationale for the indication, characteristics and clinical application is described in this paper. As a result, we will try to suggest the evidence-based guidelines for indirect composite restorations by reviewing each available indirect composite products, technical procedure and pronosis.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.110-117
• /
• 2008

Clinical performance of resin-based composite material depends on case selection and on the proficiency of the operator. Especially, composite resin restoration on permanent first molar in children have more limitations clinically than adult patients according to stage of tooth eruption and patient's compliance. This study was designed to evaluate the clinical performance of posterior composite resin restoration in children after 5 years. 35 teeth of 16 patients who were received composite resin restoration on permanent first molar in Department of Pediatric dentistry, Pusan National University Hospital between January 2001 and December 2001 were evaluated based on Modified USPHS criteria. From the finding in this study, following conclusions can be made. 1. 6 teeth(17%) of 35 teeth was replaced, so 5-years survival rate of posterior composite resin restoration is 82.9%. 2. As results of each evaluation criteria, on color match, anatomic form, surface roughness, sensitivity/ discomfort, ideal A grade score was 86.2%, 93.1%, 86.2%, 86.2%, clinically accepted B grade score was 13.8%, 0%, 13.8%, 10.3%. On marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration, A grade score was 13.8%, 44.8% and B grade score was 79.3%, 34.5% and secondary caries rate was 20.7%. 3. 69.1% of teeth (20 teeth) was clinically accepted on all evaluation criteria.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.153-165
• /
• 1992

Dental composite resin is a kind of the particle - reinforced composite material, and is widely used in recent dental restoration of anterior and posterior tooth region. The purpose of this study was to investigate the fracture behaviour according to volume fractions and external findings of the filler particles for better interpretation of the fracture characteristics of posterior dental composite resins by analytic method of fracture mechanics. The plane strain fracture toughness($K_{IC}$) and Acoustic Emission were determined with three - point bending test using the single edge notch specimen according to the ASTM - E399, and its analyzed data was compared with filler volume fractions derived from the standard ashing test and scanning electron fractographs of each specimen including the unfilled experimental resin as a control. The results were that the value of fracture toughness of the composite resin material was in the range from 0.85 MPa$\sqrt{m}$ to 1.60 MPa$\sqrt{m}$ and was higher than the value of the unfilled experimental resin, and the fracture behaviours dervied from Acoustic Emission analysis show prominent differences according to the volume fraction and the size of filler particles used in each composite resin. The degree of resistance against crack propagation seems to be increase and the fractographs demonstrate the high degree of surface roughness and irregularity according with the increase of fracture toughness value.

• Journal of the Korean Academy of Esthetic Dentistry
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.21-32
• /
• 2002

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.284-289
• /
• 2002

Background : The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the direct and indirect composite restorations which had been placed for 1 year Methods : The composite restorations which had been placed between 1999. Mar and 1999, Dec was evaluated after 1 year For direct restorations. Spectrum (Dentsply, USA) and Z100 (3M, USA) were used in the anterior teeth and Surefil (Dentsply, USA) were used. For class V restorations of anterior and posterior teeth. Spectrum was used. For indirect restorations, Targis/Vectris system (Vivadent/Ivoclar, Liechtenstein) was used 2 examiners evaluated marginal quality, proximal contact. discoloration, presence of 2$^{nd}$ caries, loss of filling and hypersensitivity of restorations. The restorations was clinically evaluated by modified methods based on USPHS. Results : 60 teeth were evaluated. 59 were clinically acceptable and 1 restoration which was placed in class v cavity in the posterior tooth was fallen out. In most cases, the restorations were clinically accept-able. For restorations which had been directly placed in the class II cavities, loose proximal contact was indicated as the main complaints. Conclusions : Most of Anterior and posterior restorations which bad been directly or indirectly placed for 1 year were clinically acceptable. For posterior teeth, loose proximal contact was indicated as the main problem in the directly placed Class II restorations. Long term clinical study is needed.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.47 no.1
• /
• pp.5.1-5.11
• /
• 2022

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the clinical longevity of a bulk-fill resin composite in Class II restorations for 3-year. Materials and Methods: Patient record files acquired from the 40 patients who were treated due to needed 2 similar sizes Class II composite restorations were used for this retrospective study. In the experimental cavity, the flowable resin composite SDR was inserted in the dentinal part as a 4 mm intermediate layer. A 2 mm coverage layer with a nano-hybrid resin composite (CeramX) was placed on SDR. The control restoration was performed by an incremental technique of 2 mm using the nano-hybrid resin composite. The restorations were blindly assessed by 2 calibrated examiners using modified United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline and 1, 2, and 3 years. The data were analyzed using non-parametric tests (p = 0.05). Results: Eighty Class II restorations were evaluated. After 3-years, 4 restorations (5%) failed, 1 SDR + CeramX, and 3 CeramX restorations. The annual failure rate (AFR) of the restorations was 1.7%. The SDR + CeramX group revealed an AFR of 0.8%, and the CeramX group an AFR of 2.5% (p > 0.05). Regarding anatomical form and marginal adaptation, significant alterations were observed in the CeramX group after 3-years (p < 0.05). The changes in the color match were observed in each group over time (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The use of SDR demonstrated good clinical durability in deep Class II resin composite restorations.

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.479-485
• /
• 1999

Materials for posterior teeth includes amalgam, gold inlay and composite resin inlay. Amalgam and gold inlay have unsatisfyine esthetics. And because they simply obturate the cavity preparation, they do not strengthen the remaining tooth structure. Posterior composite resin has become established in recent years. However, its polymerization shrinkage and insufficient wear resistance were the most undesirable characteristic. The physical and mechanical properties of the composite resin inlay are further improved through heat treatment in an oven. The major part of polymerization contraction of the resin inlay takes place be fore cementation, and possible gap formation is only due to shrinkage of the thin layer of resin cement. With the semidirect technique, the inlay material is placed directly in the prepared tooth, and the primary polymerization is made by light activation with a handhold curing unit. Additional curing may take place extraorally with use of different curing ovens. It provides the patient with the benefits of luted restorations without the procedure of indirect lab-made inlay. I report three successfully treated cases by semidirect resin inlay technique. Entire clinical steps are described in detail with some discussions on the outcome.

• Proceedings of the KACD Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.235-237
• /
• 2001

;Dentistry has benefited from tremendous advances in technology with the introduction of new techniques and materials, and patients are aware that esthetic approaches in dentistry can change one's appearance. Increasingly. tooth-colored restorative materials have been used for restoration of posterior teeth. Tooth-colored restoration for posterior teeth can be divided into three categories: 1) the direct techniques that can be made in a single appointment and are an intraoral procedure utilizing composites: 2) the semidirect techniques that require both an intraoral and an extraoral procedure and are luted chairside utilizing composites: and 3) the indirect techniques that require several appointments and the expertise of a dental technician working with either composites or ceramics. But, resin restoration has inherent drawbacks of microleakage. polymerization shrinkage, thermal cycling problems. and wear in stress-bearing areas. On the other hand, Ceramic restorations have many advantages over resin restorations. Ceramic inlays are reported to have less leakage than resin restoration and to fit better. although marginal fidelity depends on technique and is laboratory dependent. Adhesion of luting resin is more reliable and durable to etched ceramic material than to treated resin composite. In view of color matching, periodontal health. resistance to abrasion, ceramic restoration is superior to resin restorationl. Materials which have been used for the fabrication of ceramic restorations are various. Conventional powder slurry ceramics are also available. Castable ceramics are produced by centrifugal casting of heat-treated glass ceramics. and machinable ceramics are feldspathic porcelains or cast glass ceramics which are milled using a CAD/CAM apparatus to produce inlays (for example, Cered. They may also be copy milled using the Celay apparatus. Pressable ceramics are produced from feldspathic porcelain which is supplied in ingot form and heated and moulded under pressure to produce a restoration. Infiltrated ceramics are another class of material which are available for use as ceramic inlays. An example is $In-Ceram^{\circledR}$(Vident. California, USA) which consists of a porous aluminum oxide or spinell core infiltrated with glass and subsequently veneered with feldspathic porcelain. In the 1980s. the development of compatible refractory materials made fabrication easier. and the development of adhesive resin cements greatly improved clinical success rates. This case report presents esthetic ceramic inlays for posterior teeth.teeth.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.43 no.4
• /
• pp.38.1-38.9
• /
• 2018

The restoration of endodontically treated teeth (ETT) with more than one cusp missing and thin remaining walls is challenging for the general practitioner. The use of posts combined with full coverage restorations is a well-established approach, yet not following the minimal invasive principles of adhesive dentistry. Endocrowns are indirect monoblock restorations that use the pulp chamber of the ETT for retention. In this study the fabrication of 4 endocrowns and their clinical performance will be discussed. Two clinical cases include computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing manufactured molar endocrowns (one feldspathic ceramic and one hybrid composite-ceramic restoration) and the other two are dental laboratory manufactured resin composite premolar endocrown restorations. The modified United States Public Health Service criteria were used to assess the clinical behavior of the restorations at different follow up periods. Endocrown restorations present a satisfactory clinical alternative, either by the use of resin composite or glass ceramic and hybrid materials. Specific guidelines with minimal alterations should be followed for an endocrown restoration to be successful. Due to limited evidence regarding the long term evaluation of this restorative technique, a careful selection of cases should be applied.