Chaple GAM

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 348-356
PDF size: 133.56 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: the main problems and those who have the greatest impact on the failures of compound resins restorations in posterior composite, have been attributed to the marginal microfiltration. Particularly in the base of the proximal boxes Class II restorations the polymerization shrinkage can produce mismatches at the gingival margin and increase susceptibility to microfiltration, postoperative sensitivity and then dental caries.
Objective: to illustrate a modified technique Class II restorations using compound resins.
Materials and methods: the technique is mainly based on the modification of restorations of Class II cavities, remove the matrix and the continuation of the reconstruction based on a Class I a full assessment of the technique was made taking into account the scientific literature on the subject each step. The feasibility of this technique is illustrated to achieve more long-lived and aesthetic restorations.
Results: it obtains an esthetic and functional restoration with adequate margins to support forces and oclusal charges.
Conclusions: with the illustration of this technique it exposed feasibility to be applied to facilitate use by operators and comfort for patients.

REFERENCES

1. Kopperud SE, Tveit AB, Gaarden T, Sandvik L, Espelid I. Longevity of posterior dental restorations and reasons for failure. Eur J Oral Sci. 2012;120(6):539-48.

2. Shannon AT. Achieving form and function for Class II restorations using aesthetic resin stratification. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent. 2006;18(5):323-8.

3. Narang P, Shetty S, Prasad KD. An in vivo study to determine the range of posterior teeth disclusion on working side in canine-guided occlusion. Indian J Dent Res. 2012;23(6):814-8.

4. Han M, Wang RY, Liu H, Zhu XJ, Wei FL, Lv T, Wang NN, Hu LH, Li GJ, Liu DX, Wang CL. Association between mandibular posterior alveolar morphology and growth pattern in a Chinese population with normal occlusion. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2013;14(1):25-32.

5. Juloski J, Carrabba M, Aragoneses JM, Forner L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Microleakage of Class II restorations and microtensile bond strength to dentin of low-shrinkage composites. Am J Dent. 2013;26(5):271-7.

6. Fennis WM, Kuijs RH, Roeters FJ, Creugers NH, Kreulen CM. Randomized control trial of composite cuspal restorations: five-year results. J Dent Res. 2014;93(1):36-41.

7. Van Dijken JW. A 6-year prospective evaluation of a one-step HEMA-free selfetching adhesive in Class II restorations. Dent Mater. 2013;29(11):1116-22.

8. Doan D, Ercan E, Hamidi MM, Aylikçi BU, Colak H. One-year clinical evaluation of Quixfil and Gradia Direct composite restorative materials in posterior teeth. J Mich Dent Assoc. 2013;95(7):36-41,71.

9. Hernández NM, Catelan A, Soares GP, Ambrosano GM, Lima DA, Marchi GM, Martins LR, Aguiar FH. Influence of flowable composite and restorative technique on microleakage of class II restorations. J Investig Clin Dent. 2013 Aug 15.

10. Shafiei F, Akbarian S. Microleakage of Nanofilled Resin-modified Glassionomer/ Silorane- or Methacrylate-based Composite Sandwich Class II Restoration: Effect of Simultaneous Bonding. Oper Dent. 2014;39(1):E22-30.

11. Reddy SN, Jayashankar DN, Nainan M, Shivanna V. The effect of flowable composite lining thickness with various curing techniques on microleakage in class II composite restorations: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2013;14(1):56-60.

12. Bravis T, Pilecki P, Wilson RF, Fenlon M, Watson TF, Foxton RM. Effect of loading on the microtensile bond strength and microleakage of a self-etching and etch-and-rinse adhesive in direct Class II MOD composite restorations in vitro. Dent Mater J. 2012;31(6):924-32.

13. Giraldo M. Evaluación de la microfiltración marginal entre la técnica incremental y la técnica de matriz preformada con resina compuesta, en cavidades Clase IV in vitro. CES Odontología. 2011;5(2):155-158.

14. Goodchild JH. Class II composite placement is difficult! Solutions to help overcome the clinical challenges. Dent Today. 2013;32(11):110,112,114,116-7.

15. Burke FJ, Mackenzie L, Sands P. Dental materials--what goes where? Class I and II cavities. Dent Update. 2013;40(4):260-2,264-6,269-70.

16. Clark D. The new science of strong teeth: Class II preps. Dent Today. 2013;32(6):97-100.

17. Dietschi D, Argente A, Krejci I, Mandikos M. In vitro performance of Class I and II composite restorations: a literature review on nondestructive laboratory trials-- part II. Oper Dent. 2013;38(5):E182-200.

18. Simos S. Making contact just got easier. Making Class II composite restorations more predictable. Dent Today. 2012;31(9):106,108-9.

19. Takahashi R, Nikaido T, Tagami J, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Contemporary adhesives: marginal adaptation and microtensile bond strength of class II composite restorations. Am J Dent. 2012;25(3):181-8.

20. Kamath U, Sheth H. Vigneshwar. Role of delayed light polymerization of a dualcured composite base on marginal adaptation of class II posterior composite opensandwich restoration. Indian J Dent Res. 2012;23(2):296.

21. De Mattos Pimenta Vidal C, Pavan S, Briso AL, Bedran-Russo AK. Effects of three restorative techniques in the bond strength and nanoleakage at gingival wall of Class II restorations subjected to simulated aging. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17(2):627-33.

22. Mikhail SS, Johnston WM. Confirmation of theoretical colour predictions for layering dental composite materials. J Dent. 2014 Jan 22.

23. Van Ende A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B. Bulk-filling of high C-factor posterior cavities: effect on adhesion to cavity-bottom dentin. Dent Mater. 2013;29(3):269-77.