These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Composites versus amalgam: comparative measurements of abrasion resistance in vivo: 1-year results].
    Author: Meier C, Lutz F.
    Journal: SSO Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnheilkd; 1979 Mar; 89(3):203-12. PubMed ID: 293032.
    Abstract:
    A method for the in-vivo measurement of wear resistance of restorative materials is described. A profilometer is used to record the reduction in vertical dimension of the test material's occlusal surface. This loss of substance is calculated as the wear resistance index. The technique was used in a 13 month clinical evaluation of 3 different restorative materials, Adaptic, Amalgam (Dispersalloy) and Estic microfill. The procedure is simple in execution and very accurate. Statistical analysis has shown significant differences in wear resistance of the examined materials independent of patient variation. Attrition and abrasion were definitely greater with a standard composite material (Adaptic) than with amalgam and a test composite (Estic microfill). The newly developed composite material utilizing extremely fine filler particles of pyrogenic SiO2 (Estic microfill) was shown to be comparable to amalgam in wear resistance during the 13-month test period.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]