We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluation of fracture resistance and mode of failure of premolars restored with nanohybrid composite, ORMOCER and ceramic inlays.
Objectives: To evaluate the fracture resistance and mode of failure of maxillary premolars restorations restored with nanohybrid Composite, ORMOCER and Ceramic Inlays.
Materials and method: 100 extracted first maxillary premolar were collected. Samples were divided into five groups. Group I - Intact premolars, Group II -MOD cavities without restorations, Group III - MOD cavities restored with composite restoration, GROUP IV - MOD cavities restored with ORMOCER restoration and GROUP V - MOD cavities restored with ceramic inlays. All the samples were sent for the axial compression test under the universal testing machine. Fracture resistance and fracture modes were recorded.
Result: Highest fracture resistance was achieved in Group V (1324.74 ± 336.78) almost comparable to that of natural tooth (1381.07 ± 259.36) (p < 0.05), followed by Group IV (MOD cavities with ORMOCER restorations) (1082.27 ± 351.27) (p < 0.01) and least fracture resistance in Group III (MOD cavities with composite restorations) (778.35 ± 100.25) (p < 0.0001). Mode of fracture in Group IV and Group V are almost similar and In Group III 65% of the cases showed non-restorable fractures.
Conclusion: ORMOCER fracture resistance along with other groups of clinically restorable fracture stand better than Nanohybrid composite.
Clinical Relevance: Based on the present study, the dentist can utilize the ORMOCER material as a restoration material for the cavities of posterior teeth which is better in terms of fracture resistance and durability of the restoration when compare to nanohybrid composite.
Materials and method: 100 extracted first maxillary premolar were collected. Samples were divided into five groups. Group I - Intact premolars, Group II -MOD cavities without restorations, Group III - MOD cavities restored with composite restoration, GROUP IV - MOD cavities restored with ORMOCER restoration and GROUP V - MOD cavities restored with ceramic inlays. All the samples were sent for the axial compression test under the universal testing machine. Fracture resistance and fracture modes were recorded.
Result: Highest fracture resistance was achieved in Group V (1324.74 ± 336.78) almost comparable to that of natural tooth (1381.07 ± 259.36) (p < 0.05), followed by Group IV (MOD cavities with ORMOCER restorations) (1082.27 ± 351.27) (p < 0.01) and least fracture resistance in Group III (MOD cavities with composite restorations) (778.35 ± 100.25) (p < 0.0001). Mode of fracture in Group IV and Group V are almost similar and In Group III 65% of the cases showed non-restorable fractures.
Conclusion: ORMOCER fracture resistance along with other groups of clinically restorable fracture stand better than Nanohybrid composite.
Clinical Relevance: Based on the present study, the dentist can utilize the ORMOCER material as a restoration material for the cavities of posterior teeth which is better in terms of fracture resistance and durability of the restoration when compare to nanohybrid composite.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app