In this study, two different cavity designs were compared from a mechanical point of view: (a) an axisymmetric model of a conventional class 1 cavity preparation and restoration; and (b) an axisymmetric model of a modified cavity design. The modified design was characterized by a cavo-surface angle (c.s.a.) of approximately 90° and a stepped cavity wall. Using a mathematical model, stresses were calculated by finite element analysis to compare the force distribution. It is concluded that the clinical superiority of the modified cavity design, with respect to the marginal breakdown of the amalgam restoration, can be supported by stress calculations.
References
1.
Advokaat, J.G.A.; Akerboom, H.B.M.; Van Amerongen, W.E.; Borgmeyer, P.J.; and Van Reenen, G.J. (1979): The Influence of the Preparation on the Durability of the Amalgam Restoration, J Dent Res58A:199.
2.
Akerboom, H.B.M.; Borgmeyer, P.J.; Advokaat, J.G.A.; and Van Reenen, G.J. (1981): The Influence of the Preparation on the Marginal Breakdown of Amalgam Restorations. Results after 3 Years, J Dent Res60A:520.
3.
De Vree, J.H.P.; Peters, M.C.R.B.; and Plasschaert, A.J.M. (1983): A Comparison of Photoelastic and Finite Element Stress Analysis in Restored Tooth Structures, J Oral Rehabil10:505-517.
4.
Farah, J.W.; Craig, R.G.; and Sikarskie, D.L. (1973): Photoelastic and Finite Element Stress Analysis of a Restored Axisymmetric First Molar, J Biomechanics6:511-520.
5.
Kraus, B.S.; Jordan, R.E.; and Abrams, L. (1969): Dental Anatomy and Occlusion, 7th ed. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins Co., pp. 74-115.
6.
Morris, C.F. and Heuer, GA (1980): Comparison of Amalgam Margin Angles in Conventional and Modified Cavity Preparations, J Dent Res59A:380.
7.
Peters, M.C.R.B. (1981): Biomechanics of Cavity Preparation and Restoration of Human Teeth; Modeling and Analysis with the Finite Element Method. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands, p. 304.
8.
Peters, M.C.R.B. and Poort, H.W. (1983): Biomechanical Stress Analysis of the Amalgam-Tooth Interface, J Dent Res62 :358-362.
