Influence of cavity design preparation on stress values in maxillary premolar: a finite element analysis

To analyze the influence of cavity design preparation on stress values in three-dimensional (3D) solid model of maxillary premolar restored with resin composite. 3D solid model of maxillary second premolar was designed using computed-tomography (CT) data. Based on a factorial experiment, 9 different...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Croatian medical journal 2012-12, Vol.53 (6), p.568-576
Main Authors: Kantardzić, Ivana, Vasiljević, Darko, Blazić, Larisa, Luzanin, Ognjan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bicuspid
Biomechanical Phenomena
Composite Resins - chemistry
Dental Cavity Preparation - methods
Dental Enamel
Dental Materials
Dental Restoration, Permanent - methods
Dental Stress Analysis
Dentin
Finite Element Analysis
Humans
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Japan
Maxilla
Medical Research in Biophysics
Tooth Crown
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To analyze the influence of cavity design preparation on stress values in three-dimensional (3D) solid model of maxillary premolar restored with resin composite. 3D solid model of maxillary second premolar was designed using computed-tomography (CT) data. Based on a factorial experiment, 9 different mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavity designs were simulated, with three cavity wall thicknesses (1.5 mm, 2.25 mm, 3.0 mm), and three cusp reduction procedures (without cusp reduction, 2.0 mm palatal cusp reduction, 2.0 mm palatal and buccal cusp reduction). All MOD cavities were simulated with direct resin composite restoration (Gradia Direct Posterior, GC, Japan). Finite element analysis (FEA) was used to calculate von Mises stress values. The von Mises stresses in enamel, dentin, and resin composite were 79.3-233.6 MPa, 26.0-32.9 MPa, and 180.2-252.2 MPa, respectively. Considering the influence of cavity design parameters, cuspal reduction (92.97%) and cavity wall thickness (3.06%) significantly (P
ISSN:0353-9504
1332-8166
DOI:10.3325/cmj.2012.53.568