English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This in vitro study analyzed the effect of different load application devices on fracture resistance and failure mode of maxillary premolars restored with composite resin. Sixty human maxillary premolars received standardized mesio-occluso-distal cavity preparations and were restored with composite resin. The specimens were randomly divided into 6 groups (n=10). Compressive loading was applied using 6 different metallic devices: S2: 2-mm sphere; S6: 6-mm sphere; C2: 2-mm cylinder; C6: 6-mm cylinder; WS: wedge shape device; and MAT: individualized metallic antagonist tooth. Data were analyzed statistically using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The failure mode was recorded based on the 4 sequential levels. Statistical analysis revealed that WS presented significantly higher fracture resistance than S6 and C6. No significant difference was found among MAT, C2, S2 and S6. Sphere and cylinder with 6 mm were similar, with the lowest values of all groups. MAT presented the least number of catastrophic failures while C2, S2 and WS presented the highest. The type of load application device influences significantly the behavior of the teeth-restoration complex during mechanical fracture resistance test.

Influence of different load application devices on fracture resistance of restored premolars