The influence of finishing lines and margin location on enamel and dentin removal for indirect partial restorations: A micro-CT quantitative evaluation.
Dentin
Enamel
Finishing line
Indirect partial restoration
Micro-CT
Journal
Journal of dentistry
ISSN: 1879-176X
Titre abrégé: J Dent
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0354422
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
29
04
2022
revised:
11
10
2022
accepted:
14
10
2022
pubmed:
19
10
2022
medline:
25
11
2022
entrez:
18
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This in vitro research aimed to quantitatively evaluate the enamel and dentin tissue removal and the residual adhesion surface area (RAS) after different margin designs and locations for indirect partial restorations (IPR). A human molar was scanned using a Micro-CT and the STL file obtained was used to 3D-print 50 resin-tooth replicas. IPR standardized preparations were performed. The specimens were randomly assigned to 5 groups (n = 10), according to preparation and margin location to the dental equator (DE): 1) Rounded shoulder above the DE (SA); 2) Hollow chamfer above the DE (CA); 3) Butt joint above the DE (BJ); 4) Rounded shoulder below the DE (SB); 5) Chamfer below the DE (CB). Then, the tooth replicas were scanned and each STL file was aligned and superimposed to the original STL model file. Data of enamel and dentin volume removal and RAS were assessed and statistically analyzed (one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis tests for the two dental substrates respectively). Significance was set at p<0.05. Differences in dental tissue reductions were related to the margin location. Above the equator, SA, CA, and BJ performed comparably (p>0.05). Below the equator, CB was significantly more conservative in enamel reduction than SB (p<0.05) and showed the highest enamel adhesive surface exposure among the tested preparations (p<0.05). When the preparation margin is placed above DE, BJ determines a greater exposure of dentin, reducing the adhesive surface in enamel. Below DE, SB seems to be more aggressive in terms of tissue removal compared to CB. The results of this in vitro study suggest that in teeth requiring partial restoration with the margin below the dental equator, a chamfer preparation would be more conservative than a shoulder preparation. When above the equator, preparations with flat designs would expose more dentine providing a worse substrate for adhesion.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36257512
pii: S0300-5712(22)00389-X
doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2022.104334
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Composite Resins
0
Resin Cements
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104334Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.