Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of resin composite inlays in vitro

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.

Enhancing subgingival margin restoration: a comprehensive review and meta-analysis of deep margin elevation's impact on microleakage

INTRODUCTION

Restorative dentistry faces complex challenges with deep proximal surface destruction, requiring novel approaches like DME (Deep Margin Elevation). In order to achieve the best results while treating severe tooth damage, this study examines the advantages, disadvantages, and possible collaborations of different treatments.

AIMS

This systematic review investigates the efficacy of DME as an adjunctive procedure in restorative dentistry, specifically focusing on its impact on microleakage.

METHODS

The study adheres to PRISMA guidelines and employs the PICOS framework for eligibility criteria. 394 potentially qualifying studies were discovered and thorough literature search was carried out via databases. After applying inclusion criteria, 7 studies were included in the analysis. Articles were selected based on criteria that included indirect restoration and performing DME and were compared with indirect restorations without DME. Composite resin was used for DME. Other materials for DME performing, including GI and composite flow, were systematically reviewed. Data analysis was done by biostat software (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The meta-analysis of selected studies reveals a statistically significant positive effect of DME on reduction of microleakage (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study underscore the potential of DME in addressing subgingival margin challenges and provide valuable insights for restorative dentistry practices.

Long-term performance of ceramic in/-onlays vs. cast gold partial crowns - a retrospective clinical study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term clinical performance of ceramic in-/onlays (CIOs) and cast gold partial crowns (CGPCs) in posterior teeth in terms of success, survival, complications (biological, technical) and quality.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a retrospective study, a total of 325 patients were recorded after up to 24.8 years (mean 13.9 ± 3.8 years) having (pre-)molars restored with CIO (Empress I, Ivoclar Vivadent, n = 161) and CGPC (Degunorm, DeguDent, n = 164) by supervised undergraduate students. A total of 296 restorations were assessed clinically and radiologically in healthy and endodontically treated teeth using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Cumulative success and survival rates of the restorations were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Biological and technical complications were recorded. Status of oral health comprising caries risk and localized periodontitis were assessed.

RESULTS

The cumulative success rates of CIOs were 92.1% and of CGPCs 84.2% after mean service times of 14.5 years. The annual failure rates of total service times were 0.5% in teeth restored with CIO (n = 155) and 0.7% in teeth restored with CGPC (n = 163). The cumulative survival rates of CIOs were 93.9% after a mean service time of 15.2 years and decreased to 91.7% after 23.5 years. The cumulative survival rates of CGPCs were 92.6% after a mean service time of 14.9 years and 91.8% after 23.5 years. Complications in CIOs (n = 149) were ceramic fracture (6.7%), secondary caries (4.7%), endodontic complication (2.7%) and tooth fracture (1.3%) compared to CGPCs (n = 147) with endodontic complication (8.8%), secondary caries (4.8%) and decementation (2.0%). Endodontically treated teeth restored with CIO or CGPC revealed significantly less often success compared with corresponding vital teeth (p = .02). CIOs and CGPCs revealed clinically and radiographically good and excellent qualities with 71.8% (107/149) and 68% (100/147) without any significant differences regarding type of restoration.

CONCLUSIONS

Both CIOs and CGPCs achieved high survival rates up to 24.8 years when performed by supervised undergraduate students. The longevity of the restorations may benefit from the intraoral repair of accessible defects and, in case of pulp infection or necrosis, an adequate endodontic management.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

CIOs and CGPCs made by supervised undergraduate students are proper restoration types in posterior teeth in the long-term. An adequate preparation design, meticulous care in the inserting technique and constant biofilm removal due to proper oral hygiene combined with professional maintenance care are substantial. The clinical long-term performance was mostly limited by ceramic fractures in CIOs and endodontic complications in CGPCs.

M-i-M for DME: matrix-in-a-matrix technique for deep margin elevation

Deep margin elevation is a solution to the problem of localized subgingival margins when preparing a tooth for direct, semidirect, or indirect restorations. The technique focuses on the local isolation of the deep margin by using a modified circumferential matrix. An evolution of the technique is presented, the matrix-in-a-matrix technique, to facilitate the isolation and fit of the subgingival matrix by adding a sectional band inside the circumferential matrix and packing Teflon tape between the 2 bands. Resective surgeries, invasive restorative procedures, and even sometimes extractions can all potentially be avoided by this modified deep margin elevation, allowing ideal conditions for scanning or impression making.

Quality of CAD-CAM inlays placed on aged resin-based composite restorations used as deep margin elevation: a laboratory study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of the age of resin-based composite (RBC) restorations used for deep margin elevation (DME) on the marginal quality and fracture resistance of inlays.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Permanent human molars with direct RBC restorations, involving the mesial, occlusal, and distal surface (MOD), were allocated to four groups (each n = 12). Half of the teeth underwent thermomechanical loading including 240,000 occlusal load cycles and 534 thermal cycles (TML, 5 °C/55 °C; 49 N, 1.7 Hz). With RBC left in one proximal box as DME, all teeth received MOD inlays, made from lithium disilicate (LDS) or a polymer-infiltrated ceramic network material (PICN). The restored teeth underwent TML including 1.2 million occlusal cyclic loadings and 2673 thermal cycles. The marginal quality was assessed at baseline and after both runs of TML. Load-to-fracture tests were performed. The statistical analysis comprised multiple linear regressions (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Simulated aging of RBC restorations had no significant effect on the marginal quality at the interface between the RBC and the tooth and the RBC and the inlay (p ≥ 0.247). Across time points, higher percentages of non-continuous margin were observed between the inlay and the tooth than between the tooth and the RBC (p ≤ 0.039). The age of the DME did not significantly affect the fracture resistance (p ≥ 0.052).

CONCLUSIONS

Artificial aging of RBC restorations used for DME had no detrimental effect on the marginal quality and fracture resistance of LDS and PICN inlays.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This laboratory study suggests that-in select cases-intact, direct RBC restorations not placed immediately before the delivery of an indirect restoration may be used for DME.

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.

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.

Deep Margin Elevation: Current Concepts and Clinical Considerations: A Review

Dietschi and Spreafico first proposed deep margin elevation (DME) in 1998 to address the multiple clinical problems associated with sub-gingival margins, where sub-gingival margins will be repositioned coronally using composite resin restorations. Given that dentistry is directing towards conservatism, its use is currently trending. Materials and Methods: a search was performed through PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar search engines to obtain relevant articles with no time restriction. Results: With biological width taken into consideration, well-defined and polished sub-gingival restorations are compatible with periodontal health. Marginal integrity in the DME technique seems to be affected by the type of adhesive, restoration, and incremental layering of the restoration. Regarding fracture resistance, DME has no significant effects. Conclusion: The DME technique seems to be a minimally invasive alternative to surgical crown lengthening (SCL) and orthodontic extrusion (OE) with respect to biological width. Well-controlled clinical trials are limited in this field; further long-term follow-up studies emphasizing the periodontal outcomes and prevention of complications are needed.

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.

Influence of the adhesive strategy in the sealing ability of resin composite inlays after deep margin elevation

Background

The aim of this study was to determine the influence of the gingival margin position and the adhesive strategy selected to perform deep margin elevation (DME) in marginal sealing of resin composite inlays by a nanoleakage test.

Material and Methods

12 sound third molars were selected and expulsive MOD cavities for inlays were prepared. Experimental groups were established according to gingival margin location (enamel: 1 mm above cemento-enamel junction (CEJ), dentin: 1 mm below CEJ, or DME, and the adhesive strategy used to lute inlays and elevate the gingival margin. Therefore, the six experimental groups were: 1) Enamel + etch-and-rinse adhesive (ERA) Adper Scotchbond 1XT (SB1XT); 2) Dentin + SB1XT; 3) DME + SB1XT; 4) Enamel + self-etching adhesive (SEA) with enamel selective etching Clearfil SE Bond (CSE); 5) Dentin + CSE; 6) DME + CSE. Resin composite inlays were constructed (Gradia Indirect) and all luted with the same resin cement (RelyX ARC). Specimens were submitted to nanoleakage test. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction (p<0.05).

Results

A perfect sealing ability was evidenced for experimental groups with gingival margins on enamel. Similar nanoleakage values were determined when CSE adhesive was applied regardless the gingival margin position. The highest silver nitrate infiltration was detected for elevated margins with the ERA SB1XT.

Conclusions

The SEA Clearfil SE Bond showed higher sealing ability than the ERA Adper Scotchbond 1XT when margins were located on dentin, regardless margin elevation. Gingival margins on enamel together with enamel acid etching provided an excellent sealing with both adhesive systems. Key words:Adhesion, composite inlays, gingival margin, deep margin elevation, marginal seal, nanoleakage test.

Pre-endodontic restoration of structurally compromised teeth: current concepts

Teeth that require endodontic treatment are often structurally compromised and this considerably complicates endodontic procedures. Therefore, pre-endodontic restoration is a key approach that dentists should consider for such teeth. This article discusses current concepts of pre-endodontic restoration, with a focus on adhesive restorative methods and surgical/orthodontic techniques, and provides a relevant decision-making flowchart.

Highlights the importance of pre-endodontic restoration for the predictability of endodontic treatment.

Discusses restorability aspects for structurally compromised teeth.

Reviews current restorative and surgical/orthodontic techniques for pre-endodontic restoration and provides a decision-making flowchart.

Three-year Clinical Performance of Two Giomer Restorative Materials in Restorations

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The clinical performance of both conventional and flowable giomer restorative materials was particularly good in Class I restorations after three years of service.

SUMMARY

This study evaluated and compared the clinical performance of a flowable and a conventional giomer restorative material after three years. Forty-four pairs of restorations (total n=88) were placed in Class I cavities with either a flowable giomer (Beautifil Flow Plus F00; Shofu Inc, Kyoto, Japan) or a conventional giomer restorative material (Beautifil II; Shofu Inc) after the application of a dentin adhesive (FL-Bond II; Shofu Inc) and a flowable liner (Beautifil Flow Plus F03; Shofu Inc). After 3 years, 39 pairs of restorations were evaluated with the modified United States Public Health Service criteria, and digital color photographs of restorations were taken at each patient visit. The evaluation parameters were as follows: color match, marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, retention, secondary caries formation, anatomic form, surface texture, and postoperative sensitivity. Evaluations were recorded as a clinically ideal situation (Alpha), a clinically acceptable situation (Bravo), or a clinically unacceptable situation (Charlie). Data were analyzed with Fisher's exact and McNemar tests (α=0.05).None of the restorations showed retention loss, postoperative sensitivity, secondary caries, or color change. The performance of Beautifil II in terms of marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, and surface anatomic form was significantly lower at the 36-month follow-up than at baseline (p=0.007). There were no significant differences between the baseline and 36-month follow-up scores for the other criteria for Beautifil II (p>0.05). No differences were found between the baseline and the 36-month follow-up scores for any of the criteria for Beautifil Flow Plus F00 (p>0.05). No statistically significant difference in overall clinical performance was found between the 2 materials after 36 months (p>0.05).The three-year clinical performance of both restorative materials (Beautifil Flow Plus F00 and Beautifil II) was very good and not significantly different for any of the parameters evaluated.

Effect of Deep Margin Elevation on CAD/CAM-Fabricated Ceramic Inlays

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Using the deep margin elevation technique in preparations extending beyond the cemento-enamel junction appears to be beneficial in maintaining structural integrity of CAD/CAM-fabricated feldspathic ceramic inlays.

SUMMARY

Objective: To evaluate the effect of deep margin elevation on structural and marginal integrity of ceramic inlays.Methods and Materials: Forty extracted human third molars were collected and randomly separated into four groups (n=10/group). In group 1 (enamel margin group), the gingival margin was placed 1 mm supragingival to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ). In group 2 (cementum margin group), the gingival margin was placed 2 mm below the CEJ. In group 3 (glass ionomer [GI] margin group), the gingival margin was placed 2 mm below the CEJ, and then the margin elevated with GI to the CEJ. In group 4 (resin-modified glass ionomer [RMGI] margin group), the gingival margin was placed 2 mm below the CEJ, and then the margin elevated with RMGI to the CEJ. Standardized ceramic class II inlays were fabricated with computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing and bonded to all teeth, and ceramic proximal box heights were measured. All teeth were subjected to 10,000 cycles of thermocycling (5°C/55°C) and then underwent 1,200,000 cycles of vertical chewing simulation at 50 N of force. Ceramic restorations and marginal integrity were assessed with a Hirox digital microscope. The Fisher exact test (two-tailed) with adjusted p-values (α=0.05) and logistic regression were used for statistical analysis.Results: The cementum margin group had a significantly higher ceramic fracture rate (90%) compared to other groups (10% in enamel margin and GI margin groups, p=0.007; 0% in RMGI group, p<0.001). Logistic regression showed that with increased ceramic proximal box heights, the probability of ceramic fracture increased dramatically.Conclusion: Deep marginal elevation resulted in decreased ceramic fracture when preparation margins were located below the CEJ. There was no difference found between margin elevation with GI or RMGI. Increased heights of ceramic proximal box may lead to an increased probability of ceramic fracture.

Comparing endocrown restorations on permanent molars and premolars: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the success of endocrown restorations on molars in comparison with endocrown restorations on premolars.Registration number The methodology for this review is registered with the PROSPERO database (CRD42019149543).Data sources Medline, Embase, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched through January 2020, supplemented with hand searching of additional relevant journals.Data selection and data extraction Two independent reviewers screened studies against predefined inclusion criteria and extracted data.Data analysis Narrative analysis was carried out and random-effects meta-analysis was performed where possible.Results Out of the selected eight studies, reported success rate of endocrown restoration in molars varied from 72.73% to 99.57% and in premolars ranged from 68.75% to 100%, with a follow-up range of 3-19 years. The pooled odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals for failure rates in molars compared to premolars in four studies selected for meta-analysis were 1.096 (95% CI: 0.280, 4.292).Conclusions These findings showed similar success rates and no difference in the rate of endocrown failures between molars and premolars, thus suggesting that premolars may be considered suitable candidates for endocrowns. However, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to methodological limitations of the included studies. Further better quality and specifically designed controlled trials directly comparing the clinical performance of endocrowns on molars and premolars are required.

A Simple Method for Modifying the Emergence Profile by Direct Restorations: The Biologically Active Intrasulcular Restoration Technique

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

It is possible to modify the natural emergence profile of the tooth using simple intrasulcular direct restorations. The shape of the intrasulcular part of the restoration will determine the design of the gingival contour.

SUMMARY

Some clinical situations, such as the closure of pronounced diastemas and the transformation of malformed, small, or peg-shaped teeth, require a rebalancing of dental proportions accompanied by a modification of the gingival contour. A traditional treatment plan might require surgical, prosthetic, and/or orthodontic treatment, but in some cases, these therapeutic options could be considered too invasive and not always the best solution. Moreover, not all patients are ready to undergo irreversible, long, and expensive procedures. To overcome these limitations and to solve all of these clinical problems in a rapid and noninvasive way, we propose a new technique that allows us to modify the natural emergence profile of the tooth using simple intrasulcular direct restorations. Using the Biologically Active Intrasulcular Restoration technique, it is possible to rebalance tooth shape and dimensions, gingival level and contour with low biological and economic costs. This method, which does not require any preparation of the dental tissues, is reversible and minimally invasive. It is applicable to patients of all ages, and results are obtained in a single appointment.

No correlation between two methodological approaches applied to evaluate cervical margin relocation

The study evaluated the quality of gingival margins created by cervical margin relocation (CMR) technique using different materials and assessed the consistency of the results obtained by two in vitro methods: microleakage test and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mesio-occlusal-distal cavities with subgingival proximal margins were prepared. Mesial margins were elevated supragingivally with total-etch adhesive and flowable composite (Group 1) or with universal adhesive and bulk-fill flowable composite (Group 2). Distal margins were not elevated. Teeth were restored with CAD/CAM overlays. Marginal quality was evaluated by microleakage test and SEM observation of epoxy resin replicas. Statistical analyses showed no significant correlations between microleakage scores and percentage of marginal integrity observed under SEM at CMR margins, lower microleakage scores at margins without CMR compared to CMR margins, lower microleakage scores in Group 2 than in Group 1 and no difference in SEM integrity between groups at CMR margins.

Efficacy of Direct Restorative Materials in Proximal Box Elevation on the Margin Quality and Fracture Resistance of Molars Restored With CAD/CAM Onlays

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of four direct restorative materials that can be used in the proximal box elevation (PBE) technique.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Seventy-five molar teeth were randomly assigned to one of five groups (n=15): type II glass ionomer (GI), type II resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), resin-based composite (RBC), bulk-fill (BF) resin-based composite, and a control with no box elevation procedure. Specimens were prepared for a standard mesio-occlusal-distal, computer-aided design/computer-aided manufactured (CAD-CAM) resin, nanoceramic onlay with mesial cervical margins located 1 mm above the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and distal cervical margins located 2 mm below the CEJ. PBE was used to elevate the distal margins to 1 mm above the CEJ in all groups except the control group. For the control group the onlay margin was placed directly on the prepared distal tooth structure without PBE. A Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM resin, nanoceramic onlay restorative was manufactured and bonded on all specimens with RelyX Ultimate adhesive resin cement. The quality of the tooth-PBE material and PBE material-onlay interface was evaluated with scanning electron microscopy using epoxy resin replicas before and after cyclic loading (100,000 cycles, 1.2 Hz at 65N and 37°C). In addition to margin quality, the fracture resistance of each group was measured using a universal testing machine. Fracture pattern was recorded by visual examination. The Levene test for homogeneity and the Welch analysis of variance were completed for fracture resistance and margin quality. A χ² test was completed for break mode.

RESULTS

For dentin margins, a statistically significant difference was detected between the RMGI and control groups at baseline (p=0.0442). All other groups-GI, RBC, and BF-showed no difference from the control at baseline (p>0.05). No statistical significance was observed among groups for post-cyclic fatigue (p=0.8735). For onlay margins, no statistical significance was observed among groups for pre-cyclic fatigue, post-cyclic fatigue, or change (p=0.9713, p=0.528, p=0.4385, respectively). No significant difference was observed for the fracture resistance among groups or for the type of break by material used (p=0.1593, p=0.77, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Within the parameters of this study, after mechanical fatigue, the materials used for PBE: RMGI, RBC, and BF, did not influence results in terms of margin quality and fracture resistance. Therefore, collective findings suggest that these materials might be suitable for PBE procedures. Nevertheless, clinical caution is recommended with any PBE procedure and further testing of GI materials is needed.

Elevation of an Amalgam-stained Margin With Resin-modified Glass Ionomer to Support an Indirect Ceramic Restoration: A Six-year Case Report

This case report presents treatment of a mandibular second molar with an extensive proximal margin, which was finished on amalgam-stained dentin. A resin-modified glass ionomer for margin elevation and a lithium disilicate onlay were used to restore the tooth to proper form and function. The patient has been followed for six years and has had no complications during this period.

Shear bond strength and interface analysis between a resin composite and a recent high-viscous glass ionomer cement bonded with various adhesive systems

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the shear bond strength (SBS) and interface between a resin composite and a new high-viscous glass ionomer cement (HV-GIC), a HV-GIC, a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RM-GIC), a bulk-fill flowable composite, and a regular flowable composite bonded with various adhesive systems.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A resin composite (Filtek Z350) was bonded to a new HV-GIC (EQUIA Forte Fil) using various adhesive systems, including a universal adhesive in self-etch and etch-and-rinse mode (Scotchbond Universal), a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (Scotchbond 1-XT), a one-step self-etch adhesive (Optibond All-in-one) tested also after silane application (Monobond Plus), and a coating material (EQUIA Forte Coat). The resin composite was also bonded to a HV-GIC (Fuji IX GP), a RM-GIC (Fuji II LC), a bulk-fill flowable composite (SDR), and a regular flowable composite (Tetric Evo Flow) with the universal adhesive in self-etch mode (Scotchbond Universal). Two-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett's post hoc test was used to investigate the difference in SBS. Failures were analyzed by chi-square test. Bonding interfaces were examined by environmental scanning electron microscopy (E-SEM).

RESULTS

SBS to EQUIA Forte Fil was significantly lower with Scotchbond 1-XT than with all other adhesive systems. By using Scotchbond Universal with the self-etch technique, the SBS to EQUIA Forte Fil was significantly higher than the SBS to Fuji IX GP and significantly lower than the SBS to Fuji II LC, SDR, and Tetric Evo Flow. E-SEM images showed an intimate contact at all interfaces examined.

CONCLUSION

EQUIA Forte Fil showed satisfactory SBS and interfaces with all adhesives tested.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Bonding between the resin composite and HV-GIC can be achieved using a universal adhesive in self-etch mode, an easy-to-use adhesive system.

Marginal sealing of relocated cervical margins of mesio-occluso-distal overlays

We investigated the effect of cervical marginal relocation (CMR) on marginal sealing with two different viscosity resin composites, before adhesive cementation of composite computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) overlays. Standardized MOD cavities prepared in 39 human molars were randomly assigned to three groups. The proximal margins on the mesial side were located 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction. On the distal side of the tooth, the margins were located 1 mm above the cementoenamel junction. In Groups 1 and 2, mesial proximal boxes were elevated with a hybrid composite (GC Essentia MD) and a flowable composite (GC G-ænial Universal Flo), respectively. CMR was not performed in Group 3. The overlays were adhesively cemented, and interfacial leakage was quantified by scoring the depth of silver nitrate penetration along the adhesive interfaces. Leakage score at the dentin-CMR composite interface did not significantly differ between the two tested composites but was significantly lower for Group 3. In all groups, scores were significantly higher at the dentin interface than at the enamel interface. These results indicate that the performance of flowable and microhybrid resin composites, as indicated by marginal sealing ability, is comparable for CMR.

Biological evaluation of subgingivally placed direct resin composite materials

Placement of composite resin restorations in deep subgingival cavities can damage surrounding soft tissues. In addition, commonly used resin-based composites (RBCs) might interfere with wound healing and periodontal health. To clarify cellular interactions with RBCs, we used an MTT assay to investigate adhesion of primary human gingival fibroblasts and human osteoblasts (hFOB 1.19) on five RBC materials with and without surface modifications (alumina blasting with 50- or 110-μm Al₂O₃). In addition, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used to determine release of resin monomers from RBCs after 1 h, 1 day, and 7 days. As compared with tissue culture plastics (the control), cellular adhesion was significantly lower (P < 0.001) for human gingival fibroblasts and osteoblasts. Only minor, nonsignificant differences between individual RBCs were identified. HPLC analyses identified the release of three bifunctional methacrylates bisphenol A glycerolate dimethacrylate, triethylene glycol dimethacrylate, and diurethane dimethacrylate from RBCs and showed that monomer release increased between 1 h and 1 day but remained low. The present findings suggest that surface adhesion in the subgingival area is limited for the tested RBCs. Although residual monomer release was low for all tested RBCs, it might be sufficient to adversely affect cell adhesion.

Cervical margin relocation in indirect adhesive restorations: A literature review

PURPOSE

The aim of this review was to summarize the existing scientific literature investigating on cervical margin relocation technique (CMR) performed prior to the adhesive cementation of the indirect restorations.

STUDY SELECTION

An electronic search with no date restriction was conducted in the MEDLINE database, accessed through PubMed. The following main keywords were used: "cervical margin relocation", "coronal margin relocation", "deep margin elevation" and "proximal box elevation".

RESULTS

Seven in vitro studies and 5 clinical reports investigating on CMR are taken into consideration for the present review. The most frequently investigated parameter in almost all of the in vitro studies was the marginal adaptation of the indirect restorations. One study additionally assessed the influence of CMR on the fracture behavior of the restored teeth and one study assessed the bond strength of the indirect composite restoration to the proximal box floor. Clinical reports provided documentation with a detailed description of the treatment protocol. In the current literature no randomized controlled clinical trials or prospective or retrospective clinical studies on CMR technique could be found.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the reviewed literature, it can be concluded that currently there is no strong scientific evidence that could either support or discourage the use of CMR technique prior to restoration of deep subgingival defects with indirect adhesive restorations. Randomized controlled clinical trials are necessary to provide the reliable evidence on the influence of CMR technique on the clinical performance, especially on the longevity of the restorations and the periodontal health.

From 'Direct Versus Indirect' Toward an Integrated Restorative Concept in the Posterior Dentition

Traditionally, indirect restorations are expected to have better longevity than direct restorations. The introduction of adhesive dentistry and the minimally invasive approach of restorative treatment has changed this. In this article, the differences in longevity between direct and indirect restorations in the posterior dentition are explained. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of direct and indirect restorations placed in a minimally invasive way and using a proper adhesive technique are described.

Influence of different composite materials and cavity preparation designs on the fracture resistance of mesio-occluso-distal inlay restoration

The aim of the study to evaluate the fracture resistance of a computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and three indirect composite materials for three different mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) inlay cavity designs. A total of 120 mandibular third molar were divided into three groups: (G1) non-proximal box, (G2) 2-mm proximal box, and (G3) 4-mm proximal box. Each cavity design received four composite materials: Estenia, Epricord (Kuraray, Japan), Tescera (Bisco, USA), and Cerasmart CAD/CAM blocks (GC, USA). The specimens were subjected to a compressive load at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. The data was analyzed using the two-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni post hoc test (p<0.05). Estenia exhibited significantly higher fracture strength than Epricord and Cerasmart in G1. In G2 and G3, there was no significant difference among the four materials. Using a non-proximal box design for the cavity can improve the fracture resistance of the inlay restoration.

Influence of proximal box elevation on bond strength of composite inlays

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the influence of proximal box elevation on microtensile bond strength (mTBS) of composite inlays to the proximal box floor, using either a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five human molars were selected, and a class II OM (inlay) cavity preparation was performed in each tooth. Cavities were randomly assigned into four experimental groups, according to the location of the proximal cervical margin (located 1 mm below cementoenamel junction (CEJ), or with proximal box elevation with composite resin) and the resin cement used for luting (a total-etch resin cement RelyX ARC or a self-adhesive resin cement G-Cem). After 1-week water storage, samples were subjected to mTBS test. Results were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Kruskal-Wallis revealed statistically significant differences among experimental groups (p = 0.007). Both resin cements showed similar bond strength values when cervical margin was located below CEJ. The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength of composite inlays for both resin cements. However, only for G-Cem was this improvement statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The proximal box elevation improved the bond strength attained by G-Cem resin cement. For RelyX ARC, the position of the cervical margin did not affect composite inlays bond strength.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Proximal box elevation does not decline bond strength of composite inlays to the proximal floor when a total-etch or a self-adhesive resin cement is used.

Proximal Box Elevation With Resin Composite and the Dogma of Biological Width: Clinical R2-Technique and Critical Review

Provided that moisture control is possible, today's resin composite materials can be applied successfully in the restorative treatment of extensively decayed teeth. This suggests that restorative margins will be increasingly located below the cementoenamel junction, probably invading biological width. The recently introduced technique of proximal box elevation (PBE) offers the possibility of performing a stepwise elevation of deep proximal cavities to create more favorable preparation margins for direct or indirect restorations. Clinical instructions for the restoration of extensively damaged teeth are given through this presentation. A two-step R2-technique will be shown, and a critical review of the dogma of biological width will be presented.

Luting of ceramic crowns with a self-adhesive cement: effect of contamination on marginal adaptation and fracture strength

Objectives: This study evaluated the percentages of continuous margins (%CM) and fracture strength (FS) of crowns made out from blocs of leucite-reinforced ceramic (IPS Empress CAD) and luted with a representative self-adhesive cement (RelyX Unicem) under four contaminating agents: saliva, water, blood, a haemostatic solution containing aluminium chloride (pH= 0.8) and a control group with no contamination. Study Design: %CM at both tooth-cement (TC) and cement-crown (CC) interfaces were determined before and after a fatigue test consisting of 600’000 chewing loads and 1’500 temperature cycles changing from 5º C to 50º C. Load to fracture was recorded on fatigued specimens. Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare %CM and FS between the five groups with a level of confidence of 95%. Results: At the TC interface, no significant differences in marginal adaptation before loading could be detected between groups. After loading, a significant marginal degradation was observed in the group contaminated with aluminium chloride (52 ± 22 %CM) in respect to the other groups. No significant differences in %CM could be detected between the groups contaminated with saliva, water, blood and the control. At the CC interface, no significant differences in marginal adaptation were observed between the groups. The FS on loaded specimens was around 1637N, with no significant differences between groups as well. Conclusions: An adverse interaction of the highly acidic haemostatic agent with either dentin or the self-adhesive cement could explain the specimens’ marginal degradation. The self-adhesive cement tested in this study was no sensitive to moisture contamination either with saliva, water or blood.

Key words:Marginal adaptation, RelyX Unicem, contamination, all-ceramic crowns.