PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Leinfelder

Publications and source records attributed to K Leinfelder.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Using packable composites for direct posterior placement.

BACKGROUND: Although dentists have been using resin-based composites successfully to restore posterior teeth in Class II situations for several years, creating a functional, anatomical proximal contact remains a clinical challenge for many clinicians. OVERVIEW: This article presents a step by-step technique for creating a predictable proximal contact using a packable resin-based composite as the restorative material. Using a technique that is similar to that for amalgam will enable the dentist to make a successful transition to using composite as an alternative to amalgam in some posterior teeth. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: More patients today are well-informed about dental care and are seeking tooth-colored restorative alternatives. Excellent materials and proven techniques are making the transition from traditional metallic restorations easier and more predictable. With this article, the authors aim to help dentists gain confidence in their technique and enable them to provide this service for their patients.

Acid Etching, Dental↗
PubMed1999

One-year clinical evaluation of SureFil packable composite.

The purpose of this trial was to clinically evaluate SureFil high-density posterior composite for Class II restorations of permanent first and second molars. All teeth were restored in occlusion with the natural dentition. After cavity preparation, the enamel was etched for 15 seconds with 34% phosphoric acid. No liner/base material was used for the dentin. Two applications of Prime and Bond 2.1 were placed for adhesion to the exposed dentin and etched enamel. One coat of adhesive was cured for 10 seconds with a curing light, and one thin coat was spread with a gentle jet of air. The cavity was restored in 3-mm to 5-mm increments. Evaluation was assessed immediately after placement (baseline), and at 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year for retention, leakage, marginal integrity, color stability, abrasive resistance, surface staining, surface texture, postoperative sensitivity, and secondary caries. The restorations were evaluated indirectly for wear using a modified USPHS and indirect cast comparison method. At baseline, 25 restorations were graded Alfa in all categories. At 3-, 6-, and 9-month recalls (N = 24), all restorations were graded Alfa in all categories. At the 1-year recall (N = 20), there were three Bravos for surface staining.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

A new condensable composite for the restoration of posterior teeth.

Undoubtedly the greatest resistance of clinicians to use composite resins in posterior teeth relates to technique sensitivity, time consumption, and complexity. Placing conventional posterior composite resins does not take into account that composites differ considerably from amalgam. This is particularly true with respect to its physical characteristics, especially insertion and packing properties. The development of a posterior composite resin that can be placed by an amalgam carrier and subsequently packed or condensed as an amalgam, should assist clinicians greatly in their ability to successfully restore class II cavity preparations. Acknowledgment is expressed to Bruce Small, DMD, for the clinical dentistry and slides.

Composite Resins↗