![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextgreen.png)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextred.png)
Evaluation of Compressive Load Required to Fracture Premolar Restored with Different Restorative Materials-An in Vitro
Objective: To evaluate the fracture resistance of premolars with class II disto occlusal preparations restored with light cured composite with light cured composites layered incrementally and silver amalgam in comparison with intact and unrestored teeth.
Material and Methods: 50 freshly extracted premolars were randomly divided into 5 groups of 10 teeth each. All the 50 specimens were then subjected to a compressive load in a Universal Testing Machine (Hounsfield). The loads required to fracture the teeth were recorded and the data, obtained were subjected to statistical analysis and the following results were arrived.
Result: Teeth restored with light cured composite incrementally placed in oblique layers produced a higher fracture resistance than any other group and showed the closest value to the intact teeth. This was followed in descending order by light, cured composite placed in horizontal increments and silver amalgam.
Conclusion: Result concluded that teeth restored with light cured composite incrementally placed in oblique layers produced a higher fracture resistance than any other group and showed the closest value to the intact teeth.
Keywords
- Bomner FJ. Enginneering principles applied to class 2 cavities. J Dent Res 1930;10:115-9.
- Markley MR. Restorations of Silver amalgam. J Am Dent Assoc 1951;43:133-46.
- Gilmore HW. New concepts for the amalgam restoration. Practical Dental Monographs 59 nov 1964;1-31.
- Jose Mondelli, Linco-n Steagall, Aquira Ishikiriama, Maria Fidela de Lima Navarro, Francisco Bruno Soares. Fracture strength of human teeth with cavity preparations. J Prosthet Dent 1980;43:419-22.
- Joynt B, Woeczkowski G, Klockowski R, Davis EL. Fracture Resistance of teeth restored with amalgam versus composite resin. J Dent Res 1985;65:122-8.
- Joynt RB, Wieczkowski G, Klockowski R, Davis EL. Effects of composite restorations on resistance to cuspal fracture in posterior teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1987;57:431-5.
- WS Eakle. Fracture Resistance of Teeth Restored with Class II Bonded Composite Resin J Dent Res1986;65(2):149-53.
- Landy NA, Simonsen RJ. Cusp fracture strength in clas- II composite resin restorations. J Dent Res 1984;63:1075-8.
- Brannstrom M, Nordenvall KJ. The effect of acid etching on enamel, dentin, and the inner surface of the resin restoration: A scanning electron microscope investigation. J Dent Res 1977;56:917-23.
- Mc Cullock Al, Smith BGN. In vitro studies of cuspal movement produced by adhesive restorative materials. Br Dent J 1986;161:405-9.
- Mc Cullock Al, Smith BGN. In vitro studies of cusp reinforcement with adhesive restorative materials. BrDent J 1986;161:450-2.
- Markley MR. Pin reinforcement and retention of amalgam foundations and restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1958;56:675-9.
- Wieczkowski G, Joynt RB, Klockowski Record, Davis EL. Effects of incremental versus bulk fill technique on resistance to cuspal fracture of teeth restored with posterior composites. J Prosthet Dent 1988;60(3):283-7.
- Jagadish Sand, Yogesh BG. Fracture resistance of teeth with class 2 Silver amalgam, posterior Composite and glass cermet restorations. Oper Dent 1990;15:42-7.
- Jensen ME, Chan DCN. Polymerization shrinkage. International Symposium on resin based posterior filling materials 1995;5667-90.
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/abstractview.png)
Abstract Views: 283
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/pdfview.png)
PDF Views: 157