Fracture strength of class II slot cavities restored with polymerizable restorative materials

This study compared the fracture strength of Class II slot cavities restored with polymerizable restorative materials. Sixty, caries‐free, posterior teeth were divided into five groups of 12 teeth. The Class II slot cavities were prepared. The teeth were restored with two packable composites (Filtek...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Polymers for advanced technologies 2003-08, Vol.14 (8), p.586-591
Main Authors: Görücü, Jale, Özgünaltay, Gül
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
composite resins
composite resins, ormocers
fracture
ormocers
strength
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study compared the fracture strength of Class II slot cavities restored with polymerizable restorative materials. Sixty, caries‐free, posterior teeth were divided into five groups of 12 teeth. The Class II slot cavities were prepared. The teeth were restored with two packable composites (Filtek P60, Surefil), a microhybrid composite (Filtek Z250)and two ormocer (Definite, Admira). The restorations were then subjected to fracture resistance tests. The marginal ridges of the restorations were loaded at an angle of 13.5° to the long axis of the tooth in an Universal Testing Machine until failure. Analysis of mean forces indicated that, Filtek P60, Surefil and Filtek Z250 exhibited better performance than Definite and Admira. The tested resin composites differed in their mechanical properties. This study suggested that fracture behavior were highly influenced by the filler system. Overall, Filtek P60, Surefil, Filtek Z250, demonstrated good fracture resistance. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
ISSN:1042-7147
1099-1581
DOI:10.1002/pat.377