PubMed · 1076296
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
E Pillwein. 1976. [Goodbye, amalgam?].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1076296/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Composite resin has such good aesthetic qualities that it is often difficult to identify the tooth-restoration interface, yet this is particularly important should the material require complete removal. Following the in-vitro removal of direct and indirect composite resin restorations from Class II cavities significant changes in cavity size and shape were recorded. Thirty-eight cavities were studied from both occlusal and proximal aspects and the final cavity size was compared to the original cavity. There was a significant increase in cavity size with a mean increase of 37% for the direct composite cavities and 35% for the indirect cavities, although the range of values is large. Following restoration removal, occlusal surfaces were seen to increase in 71% of teeth and proximal surfaces in 75% of teeth. There was no significant difference between the results for direct and indirect composite restorations. Occlusal dovetails and cavity undercuts were created in cavities which did not contain these features initially.
This study assessed comparatively the tensile bond strengths to dentine of four resin dentine bonding agents. Flat surfaces were produced in the occlusal dentine of human third molars, finished with 600-grit paper and prepared for bonding to Silux Plus composite with Gluma, Prisma Universal Bond 2, Scotchbond 2 and Tenure. After 24 hours in water and 250 thermal cycles, the specimens were loaded in tension to failure on an Instron machine. There were 20 specimens in each test group. An analysis of variance and Duncan's test showed that the bond strengths of Scotchbond 2 (22.8 +/- 7.2 MPa) and Prisma Universal Bond 2 (20.1 +/- 7.8 MPa) were similar but significantly higher than those of Tenure (14.3 +/- 5.3 MPa) or Gluma (12.3 +/- 6.4 MPa). A Weibull analysis confirmed the superiority of Scotchbond 2 and Prisma Universal Bond 2. Scotchbond 2 and Prisma Universal Bond 2 specimens failed either in an adhesive-cohesive mode, or cohesively through the composite or the dentine. It was concluded that Scotchbond 2 and Prisma Universal Bond 2 are effective and are the dentine bonding agents of choice.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.