Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2010; 04(02): 160-165
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1697824
Original Article
European Journal of Dentistry

Effect of Hybrid Layer and Thickness on Stress Distribution of Cervical Wedge-Shaped Restorations

Evrim Eliguzeloglu
a   Department of Operative Dentistry and Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Yuzuncuyil, Van, Turkey
,
Oguz Eraslan
b   Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Selcuk, Konya, Turkey
,
Huma Omurlu
c   Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Gazi, Ankara, Turkey
,
Gurcan Eskitascıoglu
d   Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Yuzuncuyil, Van, Turkey
,
Sema Belli
e   Department of Endodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Selcuk, Konya, Turkey
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 September 2019 (online)

  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Objectives: The aim of this finite elemental stress analysis study was to evaluate the effect of a hybrid layer and the hybrid layer thickness on the shear stress distribution in mandibular premolar teeth under occlusal loading.

Methods: The mandibular premolar tooth was selected based on the anatomical measurements suggested by Wheeler. The analysis was performed with a computer with the SAP 2000 structural analysis program. Three different mathematical models were evaluated; 1) composite restoration without a hybrid layer 2) composite restoration with a 1.5 μm thick hybrid layer and 3) composite restoration with a 3 μm thick hybrid layer. A total of 200 N of occlusal loading force was simulated from the buccal tubercule and central fossa of the premolar tooth. The findings were drawn by the Saplot program.

Results: In model B, the output showed that hybrid layer reduced the shear stress concentration especially on gingival margin of the composite. Similarly shear stress intensity was decreased by a thick hybrid layer in model C, especially on the gingival margin of the composite.

Conclusions: The hybrid layer and its thickness plays an important role on stress distribution and intensity in cervical restorations. (Eur J Dent 2010;4:160-165)

Keywords

Finite element analysis - Hybrid layer - Premolar tooth - Non-carious cervical lesion - Composite restoration
 

  • References

  • 1 Rees JS, Jagger DC. Abfraction lesions: myth or reality?. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003; 15: 263-271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Grippo JO. Abfractions: a new classification of hard tissue lesions of teeth. J Esthet Dent 1991; 3: 14-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Grippo JO, Simring M, Schreýner S. Attrition, abrasion, corrosion and abfraction revisited. JADA 2004; 135: 1109-1118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Van Meerbeek B, Perdigao J, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent 1998; 26: 1-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek M. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: A systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 864-881
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Bayne SC, Wilder AD, Sluder TB, Brunson WD. Examining tooth flexural effects on cervical restorations: a two year clinical study. JADA 1991; 122: 41-47
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bayne SC, Heymann HO, Sturdevant JR, Wilder AD, Sluder TB. Contributing co-variables in clinical trials. Am J Dent 1991; 4: 247-250
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Lee WC, Eakle WS. Stress-induced cervical lesions: review of advances in the past 10 years. J Prosthet Dent 1996; 75: 487-494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Unterbrink GL, Liebenberg WH. Flowable resin composites as ‘filled adhesives’: literature review and clinical recommendations. Quintessence Int 1999; 30: 249-257
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Montes MAJR, Goes MF, Cunha MRB, Soares AB. A morphological and tensile bond strength evaluation of an unfilled adhesive with low viscosity composites and a filled adhesive in one and two coats. J Dent 2001; 29: 435-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Labella R, Lambrechts P, Van Meerbeek B, Vanherle G. Poymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composites and filled adhesives. Dent Mater 1999; 15: 128-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Van Meerbeek B, Williems G, Celis JP, Roos JR, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Assessment by nano-indentation of the hardness and elasticity of the resin dentin bonding area. J Dent Res 1993; 72: 1434-1442
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Uno S, Finger WJ. Function of the hybrid zone as a stressabsorbing layer in resin-dentin bonding. Quintessence Int 1995; 26: 733-738
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Geramy A, Sharafoddin F. Abfraction: 3D analysis by means of the finite element method. Quintessence Int 2003; 34: 526-533
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wheeler RC. Wheeler’s dental anatomy, physiology and occlusion. London: Saunders Company; 1974: 405-486
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Eligüzeloglu E, Omurlu H, Eskitascioglu G, Belli S. Effect of surface treatments and different adhesives on the hybrid layer thickness of non-carious cervical lesions. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 338-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Papavassiliou G, Kamposiora P, Bayne SC, Felton DA. 3D FEA of osseointegration percentages and patterns on implant bone interfacial stress. J Dent 1997; 25: 485-491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Radovic I, Vulicevic ZR, Garcia-Godoy F. Morphological evaluation of 2-and 1-step self etching system interface with dentin. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 710-718
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Harnirattisai C, Inokoshi S, Shimada Y, Hosoda H. Adhesive interface between resin and etched dentin of cervical erosion/ abrasion lesions. Oper Dent 1993; 18: 138-143
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Arrais CA, Giannini M. Morphology and thickness of the diffusion of resin through demineralized or unconditioned dentinal matrix. Pesqui Odontol Bras 2002; 16: 115-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Nakabayashi N, Kojima K, Masuhara E. The promotion of adhesion by the infiltration of monomers into tooth substrates. J Biomed Mater Res 1982; 16: 265-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Holmes DC, Loftus JT. Influence of bone quality on stress distribution for endosseous implants. J Oral Implantol 1997; 23: 104-111
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Keyak JH, Fourkas MG, Meagher JM, Skinner HB. Validation of an automated method of three-dimensional finite element modelling of bone. J Biomed Eng 1993; 15: 505-509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rees JS. The effect of variation in occlusal loading on the development of abfraction lesions: a finite element study. J Oral Rehabil 2002; 29: 188-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Rees JS, Hammadeh M, Jagger DC. Abfraction lesion formation in maxillary incisors, canines and premolars: a finite element study. Eur J Oral Sci 2003; 111: 149-154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Palamara D, Palamara JE, Tyas MJ, Messer HH. Strain patterns in cervical enamel of teeth subjected to occlusal loading. Dent Mater 2000; 16: 412-419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kuroe T, Itoh H, Caputo AA, Konuma M. Biomechanics of cervical tooth structure lesions and their restoration. Quintessence Int 2000; 31: 267-274
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Borcic J, Anic I, Urek MM, Ferreri S. The prevalence of noncarious cervical lesions in permanent dentition. J Oral Rehabil 2004; 31: 117-123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Holmreng EP, Seckinger RJ, Kilgren LM, Mante F. Evaluating parameters of osseointegrated dental implants using finite element analysis--a two-dimensional comparative study examining the effects of implant diameter, implant shape, and load direction. J Oral Implantol 1998; 24: 80-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Belli S, Eskitascýoglu G, Eraslan O, Senawongse P, Tagami J. Effect of hybrid layer on stress distribution in a premolar tooth restored with composite or ceramic inlay: an FEM study. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005; 74: 665-668
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Rees JS, O’dougherty D, Pullin R. The stress reducing capacity of unfilled resin in a Class V cavity. J Oral Rehabil 1999; 26: 422-427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ausiello P, Apicella A, Davidson CL, Rengo S. 3D-finite element analyses of cusp movements in a human upper premolar, restored with adhesive resin-based composites. J Biomech 2001; 34: 1269-1277
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ausiello P, Apicella A, Davidson C. Effect of adhesive layer properties on stress distribution in composite restorations--a 3D finite element analysis. Dent Mater 2002; 18: 295-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Tay FR, Pashley DH. Resin bonding to cervical sclerotic dentin: A review. J Dent 2004; 32: 173-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Menicucci G, Mossolov A, Mozzati M, Lorenzetti M, Preti G. Tooth-implant connection: some biomechanical aspects based on finite element analyses. Clin Oral Implants Res 2002; 13: 334-341
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Mac Gregor AR, Miller TP, Farah JW. Stress analysis of mandibular partial dentures with bounded and free-end saddles. J Dent 1980; 8: 27-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Reinhardt RA, Pao YC, Krejici RF. Periodontal ligament stresses in the initiation of occlusal traumatism. J Periodontal Res 1984; 19: 238-246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar