Fatigue behavior and stress distribution of molars restored with MOD inlays with and without deep margin elevation

Deep margin elevation in restorative dentistry: A scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Deep margin elevation (DME) is a restorative approach offering the possibility of performing stepwise elevation of deep proximal cavities to create more favourable margins for direct or indirect restorations. The objectives of this scoping review were to explore what is known or unknown about DME by describing a wide ranging evidence base including peer reviewed literature and non-traditionally published information on the web.

DATA

Data were extracted from the included evidence in order to describe the following: the extent and nature of the evidence base; the situations which are appropriate for DME; the materials and techniques which are used; the outcomes which have been measured in empirical studies; the risks which have been reported; and the findings which have been reported in studies which compared DME to surgical crown lengthening.

SOURCES

This scoping review included a wide range of published evidence and extensive web searching for grey literature, including CPD, training and multimedia information.

STUDY SELECTION

The findings revealed a range of published literature as well as freely available, online information advising practitioners about DME. Most empirical evidence was based on in vitro studies, and there were few clinical studies comparing DME to crown lengthening. Online information included recent, multimedia sources.

CONCLUSIONS

DME is a technique that can be used with motivated patients with good oral hygiene if rubber dam isolation is achieved, if there is no invasion of the connective tissue space, and if a strict restorative protocol is adhered to.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

With phasing out of amalgam and adhesive dentistry increasing in popularity, DME addresses multiple clinical problems associated with sub-gingival margins prior to restoration.

Biomechanical behavior of molars restored with direct and indirect restorations in combination with deep margin elevation

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

The existing knowledge is insufficient for comprehending the fatigue survival and fracture resistance of molars that have deep approximal direct and indirect restorations, whether with or without deep margin elevation (DME).

PURPOSE

The aim of this laboratory and in silico study is to investigate the fatigue survival, fracture strength, failure pattern and tooth deformation of molars restored with DME in combination with a direct or indirect restoration.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study utilized 45 extracted sound human molars, divided into three groups (n = 15). Standardized 100% inter-cuspal inlay preparations were performed, extending 2 mm below the CEJ and immediate dentin sealing (IDS) was applied. Group 1 (Co_1) was restored with direct composite; Group 2 (Hyb_2) with a 2 mm DME of direct composite and a glass-ceramic lithium disilicate restoration; Group 3 (Cer_3) a glass-ceramic lithium disilicate restoration. All specimens were exposed to a fatigue process involving thermal-cyclic loading (50N for 1.2 × 106 cycles at 1.7 Hz, between 5 and 55 °C), if teeth survived, they were fractured using a load-to-failure test and failure types were analyzed. Finite element analysis (FEA) was conducted to assess tooth deformation and tensile stress in the restorations. Statistical evaluation of fracture strength was conducted using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Fisher's exact test was utilized to analyze the fracture types and repairability. A statistical significance level of α < 0.05 was set for all analyses.

RESULTS

All specimens successfully withstood the fatigue testing procedure, and no statistically significant differences in fracture strength were observed among the three groups (P > 0.05). The Fisher's exact test indicated a significant association between the restorative material and fracture type (F2 = 18.315, df = 2, P = 0.004), but also for repairability (F2 = 13.725, df = 2, P = 0.001). Crown-root fractures were significantly more common in the Cer_3 group compared to the Co_1 group (P = 0.001) and the Co_1 group had significantly more repairable fractures (F2 = 13.197, df = 2, P = 0.001). FEA revealed comparable outcomes of deformation among models and higher maximum tensile stress on models with higher frequency of catastrophic failures.

CONCLUSIONS

All tested restoration materials exhibited comparable fatigue survival and fracture strength in this laboratory and in silico study. However, it is important to recognize the potential for more severe and irreparable fractures when opting for deeply luted glass-ceramic inlay restorations in clinical practice. In such cases, it would be prudent to consider the alternative option being a direct composite approach, because of its more forgiving fracture types and repairability.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Molars with deep approximal direct and indirect restorations, whether with or without DME, are comparable in their fatigue survival and fracture resistance to withstand intra-oral forces. Deep direct restorations exhibit more repairable fractures compared to deeply luted glass-ceramics.

Influence of the cervical margin relocation on stress distribution -

Aim: Evaluate the influence of the cervical margin relocation (CMR) on stress distribution in the lower first molar restored with direct nano-ceramic composite (zenit). Methods: A 3D model of the lower first molar was modeled and used. Standardized mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) preparation consisted in two models used in this study with mesial subgingival margin in model II. (CMR) was applied in model II using flowable composite or resin glass ionomer (Riva). Both models were restored with nanoceramic composite and then subjected to six runs (2 for the model I and 4 for model II) with load (100N) as two load cases, one at (11º) and other at (45º) from the vertical axis. The stress distributions (FEA) in the final restoration and (CMR) material were analyzed using 3D models. Results: The two models recorded an equivalent Von Mises stress and Total deformation in the final restoration, regardless of the difference in the oblique angle incidence from (11º to 45º) or the type of the material used for (CMR) there was no significant difference in the (FEA) between the model with CMR (model II) and the model without CMR (model I). Conclusions: (CMR) technique seems to be biomechanically beneficial with high eccentric applied stress, (CMR) with resin glass ionomer or flowable composite resin in combination with nanoceramic composite improved the biomechanical behavior of (MOD) cavities extended below cement enamel junction (CMR) with high modulus elasticity material like (Riva) exhibits a more uniform stress distribution. 

Different Designs of Deep Marginal Elevation and Its Influence on Fracture Resistance of Teeth with Monolith Zirconia Full-Contour Crowns

Background and objectives: Even with the demand for high esthetics, the strength of the material for esthetic applications continues to be important. In this study, monolith zirconia (MZi) crowns fabricated using CAD/CAM were tested for fracture resistance (FR) in teeth with class II cavity designs with varying proximal depths, restored through a deep marginal elevation technique (DME). Materials and Methods: Forty premolars were randomly divided into four groups of ten teeth. In Group A, tooth preparation was conducted and MZi crowns were fabricated. In Group B, mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared and restored with microhybrid composites before tooth preparation and the fabrication of MZi crowns. In Groups C and D, MOD cavities were prepared, differentiated by the depth of the gingival seat, 2 mm and 4 mm below the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). Microhybrid composite resin was used for DME on the CEJ and for the restoration of the MOD cavities; beforehand, tooth preparations were conducted and MZi crowns were and cemented using resin cement. The maximum load to fracture (in newtons (N)) and FR (in megapascals (MPa)) were measured using the universal testing machine. Results: The average scores indicate a gradual decrease in the load required to fracture the samples from Groups A to D, with mean values of 3415.61 N, 2494.11 N, 2108.25 N and 1891.95 N, respectively. ANOVA revealed highly significant differences between the groups. Multiple group comparisons using the Tukey HSD post hoc test revealed that Group D had greater DME depths and showed significant differences compared with Group B. Conclusions: FR in teeth decreased when more tooth structure was involved, even with MZi crowns. However, DME up to 2 mm below the CEJ did not negatively influence the FR. Strengthening the DME-treated teeth with MZi crowns could be a reasonable clinical option, as the force required to fracture the samples far exceeded the maximum recorded biting force for posterior teeth.

Biomechanical Performance of Mandibular Molars with Deep Mesio-Occlusal-Distal Cavities Rehabilitated with Horizontal Posts: A 3D Finite Element Analysis

Aim

To compare and contrast by three-dimensional finite element analysis the biomechanical performance of deep mesio-occlusal-distal cavities of mandibular molars reinforced by different sizes of horizontal fiber posts.

Materials and Methods

The finite element (FE) stress analysis was performed with the ANSYS, a commercial finite element method package. Based on the evidence-based scientific data and on the mechanical properties of materials, i.e., Young's modulus and Poisson ratio, the model of a mandible and mandibular first molar was replicated. The mandibular molar models replicating the clinical scenarios were simulated, designed, and built, assuming all materials to be homogenous, isotropic, and linearly elastic as follows: Model 1 control: the model of an intact first mandibular molar. Model 2: the prepared cavity mesio-occlusal-distal is replicated by the subtraction Boolean method. The remaining thickness of dentin is 1 mm. Model 3: these were rehabilitated by three different diameters of two horizontal fiber posts. Model 3A: fiber post diameter 1 mm, Model 3B: 1.5 mm and Model 3C: 2 mm. The dimensions of the cavity, the intercuspal distance between buccal walls and lingual walls, and the distance of placement of the post from occlusal reference points were all kept constant for all three subgroups of Model 3. The cavities of Model 3 were restored with Filtek bulk-fill posterior composite. After meshing the models, loads were defined on the buccal and lingual distal cusps with a constant value of 600 N and at an angle of 45°.

Results

The results of finite element analysis are expressed as stresses, i.e., tensile compressive, shear, or a combination known as von Mises stresses. The overall von Mises stresses were as follows: Model 1:154.83 Mpa; Model 2: 376.877 Mpa; Model 3A: 160.221 Mpa; Model 3B: 159.488 Mpa; Model 3C: 147.231 Mpa. Statistical analysis of the compiled data was carried out. It was seen that there was a significant difference in stress values from the intact tooth Model 1 and cavity Model 2 (p < 0.05) with means values of 53.1 and 139.22, respectively. The means of all subgroups were comparable but there was a statistically significant difference between Model 3, i.e., 3A (67.74), Model 3B (60.47), Model 3C (53.70), and Model 2. Model 1 and Model 3C had comparable mean values.

Conclusion

Rehabilitation of deep mesio-occlusal-distal cavities of molars with intact buccal and lingual walls with the aid of a horizontal post of any diameter has a similar stress distribution to an intact tooth. However, the biomechanical performance of a 2 mm horizontal post was exacting of the natural tooth. Horizontal posts can be included in expanding our restorative option for rehabilitating grossly mutilated teeth.

Deep margin elevation-Present status and future directions

OBJECTIVE

Deep margin elevation (DME) is a treatment approach to relocate the cervical margin of teeth with subgingival defects to a supragingival position with a direct restoration to facilitate rubber dam isolation, impression taking, and bonding of indirect restorations. This article provides an overview of the current scientific evidence on DME and future directions for research.

OVERVIEW

The review included 38 studies on DME, most conducted in vitro. These studies indicate that DME has no detrimental effect on the fracture resistance of restored teeth. Evidence on the impact of DME on marginal quality is conflicting, but most in vitro studies observed no negative effect. Clinical studies, most comprising small patient cohorts, demonstrated favorable restorative outcomes and suggest that DME restorations made with scrupulous care are compatible with periodontal health. Bleeding on probing may occur more frequently at sites with DME, though evidence on this is not unequivocal.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence, based largely on laboratory studies and limited clinical data, supports DME as a viable approach to restore teeth with localized subgingival defects. However, further clinical studies with long-term follow-ups are required to provide corroborative evidence.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Current evidence suggests that DME is a viable approach to restore teeth with localized subgingival defects as a possible alternative to surgical crown lengthening. Proper working field isolation, meticulous care in the bonding and buildup procedure, and biofilm removal through patient-performed oral hygiene and professional maintenance care are crucial. As scant clinical trial-based evidence is available today, further research is needed to evaluate the long-term performance of DME restorations and their impact on periodontal health.

Comparison of Polishing Systems on the Surface Roughness of Resin Based Composites Containing Different Monomers

Changes in the organic matrix of composite resins have been proposed to improve their surface properties. However, polishing systems may perform differently in different materials. This study compared the effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of four composite resins containing different resin monomers: Admira Fusion (nanohybrid containing pure ormocer), Aura Bulkfill (nanohybrid containing Bis-GMA, UDMA), Charisma Diamond (nanohybrid containing TCD-DI-HEA) and Vittra APS (nanofilled containing UDMA). Cylinders (N = 120, n = 10) were prepared from each material and the top surface of each specimen was grounded using a diamond finishing bur. Baseline measurements of surface roughness (Ra) were recorded using a contact profilometer and the specimens of each composite were divided into three subgroups according to the polishing system: one-step, two-step, three-step. Ra measurements were recorded also after polishing. Data were analyzed using three-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). The baseline roughness of all composites was significantly reduced after polishing (p < 0.001). The two-step polishing system provided the smoothest surface for Admira Fusion (0.0770 ± 0.0171) and Charisma (0.1091 ± 0.0090), whereas for Aura and Vittra no significantly differences were found for the three polishing systems tested. The surface smoothness seems to be more material dependent than step dependent, but all tested systems provided clinically acceptable results.

Deep Margin Elevation: A Literature Review

A conservative approach for restoring deep proximal lesions is to apply an increment of composite resin over the preexisting cervical margin to relocate it coronally, the so-called “deep margin elevation” (DME). A literature search for research articles referring to DME published from January 1998 until November 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed), Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Semantic Scholar databases applying preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. Elevation material and adhesive system employed for luting seem to be significant factors concerning the marginal adaptation of the restoration. This technique does not affect bond strength, fatigue behavior, fracture resistance, failure pattern or repairability. DME and subgingival restorations are compatible with periodontal health, given that they are well-polished and refined. The available literature is limited mainly to in vitro studies. Therefore, randomized clinical trials with extended follow-up periods are necessary to clarify all aspects of the technique and ascertain its validity in clinical practice. For the time being, DME should be applied with caution respecting three criteria: capability of field isolation, the perfect seal of the cervical margin provided by the matrix, and no invasion of the connective compartment of biological width.

Functional or Nonfunctional Cusps Preservation for Molars Restored with Indirect Composite or Glass-Ceramic Onlays: 3D FEA Study

Evidence regarding the effect of the onlay preparation design for different CAD/CAM restorative materials considering the preservation of cusps is lacking. Molars were 3D-modeled in four preparation designs for onlay restoration: traditional design with functional cusp coverage (TFC), non-retentive design with functional cusp coverage (NFC), traditional design with non-functional cusp coverage (TNFC) and non-retentive design with non-functional cusp coverage (NNFC). The restorations were simulated with two CAD/CAM restorative materials: LD—lithium disilicate (IPS e.max CAD) and RC—resin composite (GrandioBloc). A 100 N axial load was applied to the occlusal surface, simulating the centric contact point. Von Mises (VM) and maximum principal (Pmax) stress were evaluated for restorations, cement layer and dental substrate. The non-retentive preparation design reduced the stress concentration in the tooth structure in comparison to the conventional retentive design. For LD onlays, the stress distribution on the restoration intaglio surface showed that the preparation design, as well as the prepared cusp, influenced the stress magnitude. The non-retentive preparation design provided better load distribution in both restorative materials and more advantageous for molar structure. The resin composite restoration on thenon-functional cusp is recommended when the functional cusp is preserved in order to associate conservative dentistry and low-stress magnitude.