Class II composite resin restorations: faster, easier, predictable

Effects of different surface treatments on surface topography and bond strength in the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of different surface treatments on the repair bond strength between a fiber-reinforced dentin composite and a posterior composite.

METHODS

Forty fiber-reinforced dentin composite resin blocks (4 mm × 4 mm × 4 mm) were separated into eight groups (n = 5) according to the surface preparation methods: (G1) negative control group, (G2) adhesive application, (G3) 50% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) application, (G4) 50% DMSO + adhesive application, (G5) 37% phosphoric acid etch + adhesive application, (G6) air abrasion + adhesive application, (G7) 37% phosphoric acid etch + 50% DMSO application + adhesive application, and (G8) air abrasion +50% DMSO application + adhesive application group. The composite surfaces were repaired in two layers with a posterior composite. Composite sticks were subjected to a micro tensile bond strength (μTBS) test. Fractured surfaces were evaluated using a stereomicroscope (×25). Short fiber-reinforced composite samples' surfaces were investigated by scanning electron microscope (SEM). Shapiro Wilk, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey HSD tests were used for statistical evaluation.

RESULTS

The highest average (μTBS) values were observed in G8, whereas the lowest mean μTBS values were evident in the G1 group. Statistically significant μTBS values were found in all adhesive-applied groups when compared with the negative control group. Notably, the application of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not lead to a statistically significant increase in μTBS values. SEM images demonstrated that acid etching partially eliminated residues on the composite surface, while air abrasion had a detrimental effect on the integrity of fiber structures.

CONCLUSION

In the repair of fiber-reinforced dentin composite with a posterior composite, adhesive application is an effective approach. The treatment of 50% DMSO without adhesive did not confer a statistically significant advantage, and the supplemental use of acid etch or air abrasion did not show an additional benefit compared to adhesive-only repairs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Adhesive application emerges as a potent and effective strategy for the repair of bur-roughened fiber-reinforced dentin composites. With its limitations, the study highlights the efficacy of adhesive-only repairs without the necessity for additional surface treatments.

Predictors of procedural errors in class II resin composite restorations using bitewing radiographs

Objective

To identify the potential factors that induce procedural errors during posterior proximal resin composite restorations placed by dental students.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study evaluated 803 bitewing radiographs of posterior proximal resin composite restorations placed by dental students at Imam Abdulrahman bin Faisal University. Atypical radiographic signs of failure were screened, and different patient-, operator-, and clinical-related factors were recorded. Chi-square test was used to examine the relationship between procedural errors and recorded factors. Stepwise adjusted logistic regression model was performed to identify predictors of procedural errors.

Results

The most observed errors were internal gaps at the bonding interface and internal voids. Molars had 0.39 the risk of internal voids (odds ratio [OR] = 0.39; confidence interval [CI] = 0.25-0.60; P = <0.0001), 0.41 the risk of sharp angle (OR = 0.41; CI = 0.24-0.68; P = <0.001), and 0.57 the risk of open contact (OR = 0.57; CI = 0.34-0.97; P = 0.04) compared to premolars. Those who were >40 years of age had 1.79 the risk of overhang compared to younger patients (OR = 1.79; CI = 1.04-3.11; P = <0.04). First molars and premolars had 0.64 the risk of overhang compared to second molars and premolars (OR = 0.64; CI = 0.41-1.00; P = 0.04). Junior students had 1.97 the risk of internal gap compared to their senior counterparts (OR = 1.97; CI = 1.20-3.21; P = 0.008). Mesial restorations had 0.38 the risk of external gap compared to mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) restorations (OR = 0.38; CI = 0.19-0.78; P = 0.003). Restorations with a margin coronal to the cemento-enamel junction (CEJ) had 0.44 the risk of external gap compared to those restorations with a margin apical to the CEJ (OR = 0.44; CI = 0.29-0.66; P = <0.0001).

Conclusion

Our findings suggested a higher incidence of procedural errors in restoring premolars and MOD cavity preparations. Therefore, it is crucial to enhance the comprehensiveness of laboratory training and expose students to diverse clinical scenarios and various techniques.

Prevalence and mean number of teeth with amalgam and nonamalgam restorations, United States, 2015 through 2018

BACKGROUND

Amalgam has been used for more than 150 years as a safe and reliable restorative material. The authors described the occurrence of amalgam and nonamalgam restorations in the United States in primary and permanent teeth across age groups and according to sociodemographic characteristics.

METHODS

The authors used clinical examination data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015-2018 for participants 2 years and older (n = 17,040). The authors estimated the prevalence and mean number of amalgam and nonamalgam restorations in primary and permanent teeth according to age groups (2-5 years, 6-11 years, 12-15 years, 16-19 years, 20-39 years, 40-59 years, 60-79 years, and ≥ 80 years), race and ethnicity, federal poverty guideline, education, and pregnancy status.

RESULTS

The prevalence of amalgam restorations ranged from 4% through 69%. Overall, amalgam restorations were more prevalent in children and adolescents from racial and ethnic minority groups and families at lower poverty levels and with lower education. The mean number of teeth with nonamalgam restorations was higher than those with amalgam restorations in primary teeth of children aged 6 through 11 years, permanent teeth of those 12 through 15 years and 20 through 39 years, and women aged 20 through 49 years, regardless of pregnancy status. The mean number of amalgam restorations was higher than that for nonamalgam restorations in older age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonamalgam restorations were the most common in the primary teeth of children older than 5 years and in the permanent teeth of adults younger than 40 years. Amalgam restorations were more common in older adults. Amalgam and nonamalgam restorations were equally common in children younger than 5 years.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The study findings suggest a shift from amalgam to alternative restorative materials in the United States.

Evaluation of push-out bond strength of different concentrations of chitosan nanoparticles incorporated composite resin and eighth-generation bonding agent for class II restoration: An in vitro study

Aim

The aim of this study is to evaluate the push-out bonding strength of class II cavities of maxillary molars restored with different concentrations of chitosan nanoparticles (CSN) incorporated in universal composite resin and eighth-generation dentin bonding agent (DBA).

Materials and Methods

Seventy extracted human maxillary first molar teeth were cleaned and mounted in acrylic mold up to 2 mm below cementoenamel junction and mesio-occlusal Class II cavities with standard measurements were prepared. CSN 2% and 0.25% powder were added to the DBA and composite resin. The samples then arbitrarily divided into three groups for restoration: Group 1: composite restoration without CSN (control group) (n = 10), Group 2: 2% CSN (n = 30), and Group 3: 0.25% CSN (n = 30). Groups 2 and 3 were further subdivided into three subgroups (n = 10 each) subgroup A. CSN incorporated in composite resin. B. CSN incorporated in DBA and C. CSN incorporated in composite and DBA. After restoration, push-out bond strength was evaluated in each sample using a universal testing machine, and data collected were statistically analyzed by one-way analysis of variance and Post hoc Tukey tests (P ≤ 0.05).

Results

Subgroup 3A (0.25% CSN + composite) has shown an increase in bond strength among all experimental groups with no significant difference between group 1 (control group).

Conclusion

CSN 0.25% incorporated in composite or DBA exhibits no harmful effect on the bond strength of class II restorations. Hence, it can be used to improve the antibacterial action and longevity of composite resin.

Toward a Clinically Reliable Class II Resin Composite Restoration: A Cross-Sectional Study into the Current Clinical Practice among Dentists in Saudi Arabia

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current clinical practice of general dentists in Saudi Arabia in restoring class II cavities using direct resin composites and to set evidence-based practice recommendations of concern.

Methods

An online survey formed of 20 questions and classified into four domains was developed. 500 dentists in 5 Saudi provinces were invited to join the survey anonymously and voluntarily using poster announcements and e-mail invitations. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze participants' responses.

Results

343 responses were received. Dentists in Saudi Arabia vary in their clinical practices and techniques of insertion of resin composite in class II cavities. 67% of participants use cotton rolls for isolating the field while 32% use rubber dam isolation. 33% and 28% of respondents use circumferential matrix (Tofflemire) and AutoMatrix, respectively. Fracture, followed by recurrent caries and open proximal contacts, was the received main reason of failure of class II direct resin composite restorations.

Conclusion

Diversity of class II resin composite practices exists among dentists in Saudi Arabia. For ensuring optimum quality outcomes and high standards of restorative dentistry healthcare, several dentists in Saudi Arabia need to reconsider their clinical practice and modify their clinical procedures of direct class II resin composites. Several evidence-based practice guidelines are recommended to dentists in this article to improve their practice and enhance the clinical reliability and longevity of class II direct resin composite restorations.

Placement of Posterior Composite Restorations: A Cross-Sectional Study of Dental Practitioners in Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia

Dental practitioner-related factors can affect the quality of composite restorations. This study aimed to investigate the clinical techniques used by dental practitioners (DPs) while placing direct posterior composite restorations. Methods: A questionnaire survey that sought information related to the placement of posterior composite restorations was delivered to 161 DPs working in the Al-Kharj area, Saudi Arabia. The collected data were statistically analyzed using Pearson’s Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test considering the DP’s working sector and the answered questions. Results: A total of 123 DPs completed the survey (76.4% response rate). There was a statistically significant difference between DPs working in the private sector and those working in the governmental sector in 7 out of 17 questionnaire items namely: preparing a minimum depth of 2 mm, (p = 0.001); mechanical means of retention, (p = 0.003); operative field isolation, (p = 0.004); adhesive strategy, (p < 0.001); light-curing unit used, (p = 0.013); the use of radiometer, (p = 0.023), and dental matrix selection, (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The clinical techniques applied by DPs working in the private sector in Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia when placing posterior composite restorations, including the specifications of cavity preparation, operative field isolation, and selection of the dental matrix system, may be substandard compared to those applied by DPs working in the governmental sector.

A comparison of diagnosis of early stage interproximal caries with bitewing radiographs and periapical images using consensus reference

OBJECTIVES:

The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic property of intraoral bitewing radiographs (BTW) for early stage interproximal caries, and to compare them with periapical radiographs (PA) at different levels of caries progression.

METHODS:

A total of 241 interproximal surfaces of BTW and corresponding PAs were used. Seven teaching faculty consisting of three oral and maxillofacial radiologists, two operative faculty, and two prosthodontists evaluated the images. The observers graded images as either "intact", "enamel caries <1/2 width", "enamel caries >1/2 width", or "caries into dentin". The gold-standard was established by consensus of two experienced faculty with 35 years and 27 years of experience. Specificity, sensitivity, positive-predictive value, and negative-predictive value were calculated for the different level of caries progression. Furthermore, receiver operating curves) of BTW and PAs of each evaluator were made and the area under the curve of BTW and PAs were compared.

RESULTS:

There was no significant difference in the specificity of BTW and PAs. BTW showed significantly higher sensitivity than PAs in all levels of caries progression (p<0.01). Positive-predictive value and negative-predictive value of BTWs were also significantly higher than PAs. One-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test showed a significant difference in sensitivity with different levels of caries progression. The average area under the curve was significantly higher for BTWs than PAs (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

BTWs offer a significant advantage over PAs in the diagnoses of early stages of interproximal carious lesions.