Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 18, 2026
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
Effect of composite/amalgam thickness on fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth, restored with combined
Maryam Firouzmandi1, Maryam Doozandeh1, Zahra Jowkar1
1DMD, MScD, Assistant Professor. Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
Background:
Combined amalgam-composite restorations have been used through many years to benefit from the advantages of both dental amalgam and composite resin. Two variations have been mentioned for this technique, this study investigated the fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth with extended mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities, restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restorations.
Material And Methods:
Sixty intact extracted premolar teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups (G1-G6) of 10 teeth. G1; consisted of intact teeth and G2; consisted of teeth with MOD preparations were assigned as the positive and negative control groups respectively. Other experimental groups after MOD preparations were as follows: G3, amalgam restoration; G4, composite restoration; G5 combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement only on 1mm of the gingival floor of the proximal boxes; G6, combined amalgam-composite restoration with amalgam placement to the height of contact area of the proximal surface of the tooth. Fracture strength of the specimens was measured and the data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The level of significance was P<0.05. Fracture mode of the specimens was also recorded.
Results:
G1 had the highest value of fracture resistance (1736.90 N). G2 and G3 had the lowest fracture resistance (775.70 N and 874.70 N, respectively). The difference between G 4, 5 and 6 was not statistically significant. However, G4, G5 and G6 showed significantly higher resistance to fracture compared to G2 and G3. Fracture modes were favorable in all of the study groups except in G6.
Conclusions:
Fracture resistance of the premolars restored with the two variations of combined amalgam-composite restoration was similar to that achieved with composite restoration alone and more than that of amalgam restoration alone. It can be concluded that the thickness of amalgam in combined amalgam-composite restorations did not affect fracture resistance of the teeth.
Key Words:
Amalgam, composite, fracture resistance, restoration.
