Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Create your own stunning objects, from easy projects to statement pieces, with the magic of epoxy resin. This groundbreaking maker's manual masterfully guides you through the entire process, from proper planning to finished work. Learn how to prepare surfaces, which epoxy to use, and the right temperatures for your workspace and materials. Determine how much time you need for a project and how to support weight effectively. Understand how to mix and add colors and how to prepare and remove molds. Figure out how to achieve textures and tackle problems such as bubbles, drips, and dust. Explore color schemes, customizations, and ways to add impact and depth, including embedding objects, incorporating other media, and finishing techniques. Packed with tips, this must-have book features step-by-step instructions and photos for 12 projects-from bookmarks and coasters to countertops and dining tables-that anyone can create. The epoxibilities are endless\"-- Provided by publisher.

Background The cementation of indirect restorations is a critical step influencing their long-term clinical success. While dual-cure resin cements are widely used, injectable resin composites have emerged as promising alternatives, offering improved handling, high filler content, and esthetic stability. However, their clinical performance as luting agents for indirect restorations remains insufficiently explored. This trial assessed the clinical performance of indirect hybrid ceramic onlay restorations cemented with injectable resin composite versus dual-cure resin cement over 18 months. Materials and methods A total of 28 participants were randomly assigned to two groups ( n  = 14) based on the cementation protocol. The intervention group received onlays cemented with injectable resin composite (BEAUTIFIL Flow Plus X F03, Shofu Dental Corporation), while the control group received dual-cure resin cement (BeautiCem SA, Shofu Dental Corporation). Standardized procedures were followed for cavity preparation, immediate dentin sealing, cavity optimization, impression-taking, onlay fabrication (SHOFU Block HC, Shofu Dental Corporation), and cementation. Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 12, and 18 months using the modified USPHS criteria. Data were statistically analyzed with significance set at P  ≤ 0.05. Intergroup comparisons were assessed with Chi-squared test, while intragroup comparisons were assessed with Cochran’s Q test. Kaplan–Meier analysis and the log-rank test were used to evaluate survival rates. Results Inter- and intragroup comparisons revealed no significant differences between the two groups for most outcomes ( P  > 0.05). However, at 18 months, dual-cure resin cement exhibited significantly higher marginal discoloration than injectable resin composite ( P  = 0.038). Within the dual-cure resin cement group, a significant decline in alpha scores for marginal discoloration was observed from baseline to 18 months ( P  = 0.007). While no restorations failed (Charlie score), Kaplan–Meier survival analysis and the log-rank test demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the two groups ( P  = 0.029). Conclusions After 18 months, injectable resin composite demonstrated acceptable and comparable clinical performance to dual-cure resin cement, with the added benefit of reduced marginal discoloration. Clinical relevance Injectable resin composites offer a viable alternative to dual-cure resin cements for luting indirect restorations with enhanced esthetic outcomes. Trial Registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ , (NCT05954156), 20-07-2023.

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical performance of a monoshade universal resin composite as posterior restoration. Twenty adult patients having at least two carious lesions related to posterior teeth were selected. Each patient was provided with a monoshade resin composite (Omnichroma) and polyshade nanohybrid resin composite (Tetric ® N-Ceram) for class I or II restorations. The performance of these restorations was assessed at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months according to the modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria. Statistical analysis was carried out employing the Friedmann test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, with a significance level of p  = 0.05. None of the restorations exhibited any clinical conditions warranting replacement. The monoshade universal group revealed prevalence of (Bravo) scores concerning the anatomic form, surface texture and post-operative sensitivity through the follow-up period ( P  = 0.317). For color match and color stability, the polyshade group revealed a statistically significantly higher incidence of (Alpha) scores after 9 and 12 months ( P  = 0.025). After 12-months of follow-up, the monoshade universal resin composite demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance. It can serve as a viable substitute for polyshade nanohybrid composite where chair side time is an essential concern.

Background Obtaining a perfect color match with resin composite presents a significant challenge. The chameleon effect has enabled resin composite to mimic the color of the adjacent tooth structure in vitro. This double-blind, split-mouth and equivalent randomized clinical trial evaluated the color matching of one-shade resin composite with chameleon effect versus multi-shade resin composite in non-carious cervical lesion restorations (NCCLs). Methods One hundred twenty restorations were performed on NCCLs with two restorative materials ( n  = 60). After prophylaxis, the teeth were isolated with rubber dam and one universal adhesive was applied in the selective enamel etching strategy. For both groups, the restorations were inserted incrementally. The values of ΔE ab and ΔE 00 in the cervical and middle third were evaluated using a digital spectrophotometer before vs. after the restorations. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and after 7 days, 6-, 12- and 18-month of clinical performance according to the FDI criteria (Word Federation Criteria). Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-square test for all parameters. Color change was analyzed by two one-sided t-tests for paired samples (α = 0.05). Results Regarding the color measurement no significant difference was observed when Vittra APS (FGM Dental Products, Joinville, SC, Brazil) was compared to Vittra Unique (FGM Dental Products, Joinville, SC, Brazil) for any of the comparisons performed ( p  > 0.05). However, the ΔE ab and ΔE 00 values for the cervical third, both before and after the restorations, were higher compared to the ΔE ab and ΔE 00 values observed when comparing the cervical and middle thirds after the restorations. After 18 months, five restorations exhibited minimal discrepancies in terms of marginal adaptation or marginal discoloration ( p  > 0.05). In all other criteria, including retention rate, no changes were detected at the 18-month recall. Conclusions The one-shade resin composite used achieve the same color match when compared to a multi-shade resin composite after a period of 7 days in NCCLs. Overall, the restorations scored clinically very good (FDI) at baseline and after 18 months for all outcomes. Clinical Significance The use of a one-shade resin composite in NCCLs can be recommended because it has the ability to simplify the restoration procedure and maintaining an excellent clinical performance. Registration of clinical trials RBR-8txr4fw: 26/05/2022.

Background Cervical carious lesions present a clinical challenge due to several factors and require restorative materials with optimal performance. This trial evaluated the clinical performance and cost-effectiveness of low-shrinkage giomer resin composite (LS-GRC) compared to resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) for restoring cervical carious lesions over a 12-month period. Participants and methods A total of 56 class V cavities were randomly assigned to two groups ( n  = 28). Intervention group received LS-GRC (Beautifil II LS, Shofu Dental Corporation, Kyoto, Japan), and control group received RMGI (Fuji II LC, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). Restorations were evaluated using revised FDI criteria at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Data were statistically analyzed with a significance level of P  ≤ 0.05. Intergroup comparisons were assessed with Chi-squared test, while intragroup comparisons were assessed with Cochran’s Q test. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost per success ratio (CPSR) were used for cost-effectiveness analysis. Results After 12 months, intergroup comparisons revealed no significant differences for all outcomes ( P  > 0.05), except for surface luster and texture, which favored LS-GRC ( P  < 0.05). Intragroup comparisons revealed no significant differences within LS-GRC group ( P  > 0.016), while within RMGI group, significant differences were observed for surface luster and texture after 12 months ( P  < 0.016). ICER analysis showed that the cost for each additional 1% improvement in clinical outcomes with LS-GRC was approximately 1.6 times higher than that of RMGI. The CPSR for LS-GRC was 4.6% lower than that of RMGI, indicating that, despite its higher initial cost, LS-GRC provided comparable clinical performance, with significantly improved esthetic surface quality and favorable cost-effectiveness over the 12-month period. Conclusions LS-GRC and RMGI exhibited comparable performance and were clinically acceptable after 12 months. Clinical relevance Low-shrinkage giomer resin composite offers bioactivity, superior restoration integrity, and excellent esthetics, helping achieve optimal cervical restorations with improved clinical success, durability, and sustained cost-effectiveness. Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ , (NCT05930548), 30–06–2023. Graphical Abstract

Background. The aim of the current study was to evaluate and compare the influence of Dycal, Lime-Lite, TheraCal LC, Biodentine, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), and Activa BioActive as the pulp capping material on the shear bond strength of resin composite to dentin. Methods. A total of 70 extracted caries-free molars were randomly assigned to seven groups. Six test groups were covered with various protective liners: Dycal, TheraCal LC, Lime-Lite, Activa BioActive, Biodentine, and RMGIC. The control group received no liner pretreatment. Each sample was bonded to resin composite using the total-etch Tetric N bond adhesive. The samples were then tested for shear bond strength using the universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 1 mm/min until bond failure occurred. The data were analyzed using the one-way ANOVA test followed by the Tamhane post hoc test for pairwise comparisons of the groups. Results. Independent of the type of the applied liner, all groups exhibited inferior SBS to dentin compared to the control group. TheraCal and RMGIC showed significantly higher shear bond strength than Biodentine and Dycal, which showed the lowest shear bond strength. Lime-Lite and Activa also had significantly lower SBS results than TheraCal. The mode of fracture was predominantly cohesive in Dycal, Biodentine, and TheraCal and adhesive in Activa. Conclusion. This present study concludes that the bond strength of resin composite to dentin can be affected differently using various types of liners.

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the effect of the application of an additional hydrophobic bonding resin on the clinical performance of a universal adhesive applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) or self-etch adhesive (SE) strategy in non-carious cervical lesions (NCCLs) after 5 years.Materials and methodsScotchbond Universal Adhesive (3M Oral Care) was applied in 134 NCCLs of 39 subjects using different adhesion approaches: 3-step ER (3-ER), 2-step ER (2-ER), 2-step SE (2-SE), and 1-step SE (1-SE). Enamel and dentin were acid etched prior to application of the universal adhesive for the 3-ER and 2-ER groups. An extra layer of a hydrophobic bonding resin was applied for groups 3-ER and 2-SE. All lesions were restored with Filtek Supreme XTE resin composite (3M Oral Care). Restorations were evaluated at baseline and at 5 years using the modified USPHS criteria. Mann–Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests were performed, and the survival rates (retention/fracture) were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier and log-rank tests (p < 0.05).ResultsThe recall rate was 66.7% at 5 years. The cumulative survival rate was 96.9% for 3-ER, 96.8% for 2-ER, 71.4% for 2-SE, and 81.3% for 1-SE strategies. The log-rank test was statistically significant (p = 0.006). Retention rates were 100% for both ER groups, 75% for 2-SE and 81.3% for 1-SE. At 5 years, 2- and 1-SE approaches showed similar retention rates, but lower than those for 3- and 2-ER. A significant decrease in retention rate was detected for 2-SE (p = 0.007) and 1-SE (p = 0.014) groups between baseline and 5 years. All groups, except 2-ER, showed an increase in marginal discoloration. For this parameter, significant differences were detected between 2-ER and 1-SE (p = 0.004).ConclusionsThe addition of a hydrophobic bonding resin to the recommended application sequence of Scotchbond Universal Adhesive did not improve its clinical performance in NCCLs after 5 years. Higher retention rates were measured when this adhesive was applied in ER mode.Trial registrationThis manuscript is a 5-year follow-up of a randomized clinical trial that started in 2012 when there was no strong recommendation for registration in clinicaltrials.gov. The results after 36 months of clinical service were previously published in this journal.

Objective. The aim of this study was to monitor the behavior of interfacial gaps formed under different bonded polymeric restorations before and after thermocycling (TC), using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT) and confirming the obtained findings with confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). Materials and Methods. Cylindrical class I cavities were prepared in twenty noncarious human premolar teeth (1.5 mm depth×3.5 mm diameter) and divided randomly into two groups: TS and SN, according to the adhesive system (n=10). In the TS group, one-step self-etch adhesive Clearfil Tri-S Bond Plus (Kuraray Noritake Dental, Japan) was used, followed by composite restoration using Estelite Sigma Quick (Tokuyama Dental, Japan). In the SN group, the cavities were restored with the two-step self-etch/composite silorane-based resin restoration system (3M ESPE, USA). All specimens were restored in bulk filling technique and cured in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions. Both groups were imaged under SS-OCT after 24 h and recorded as controls. Then, each group was subjected to thermal challenge using the TC machine (5–55°C) and B-scans were recorded at different TC intervals (2600, 5200, and 10000). In order to confirm the SS-OCT findings, additional specimens were prepared, scanned, and sectioned for CLSM observation. Results. B-scans demonstrated white clusters at the tooth-resin interface that corresponded to the gap location on CLSM images. The TS group showed significantly less gap formation than the SN group before and after TC (p<0.001). Conclusions. An optimal composite adaptation can be achieved when the bonded restoration comprises a combination of an adhesive containing 10-MDP monomer and a considerable highly filled composite.

This study utilizes mechanical interlocking as a method to improve the adhesion between the 3D carbon felt foam (CFs) and the epoxy matrix (EP). Hydrothermally, Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nanoarrays in nanostrips, nanowires, nanoprisms, and nanostars were added to CFs surfaces. Pure 3D carbon fiber-epoxy composites had 62.7% higher storage modulus and 7.8% higher glass transition temperature than pure epoxy. The 3D carbon fiber/epoxy composite with Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nanowires has a storage modulus of 5297 MPa and a Tg of 148.4 °C, which is higher than that of pure 3D CFs and other nanocomposites. Compared to pure 3D CFs/ EP, Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nanowires boost flexural strength by 75.0%. Nano-strip, nano-prismatic, and nanostar composites improve 53.6%, 21.4%, and 11.43%, respectively. Pure 3D CFs boost epoxy matrix impact strength to 174.6%. The impact strength of the Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nano-wire@CFs/EP composite is 45.6% higher than that of the 3D CFs/EP composite. Nano-strip, nano-prismatic, and nano-star modifications are 31.2%, 19.5%, and 2.5%. 3D CFs/EP composites have a 69 MPa initial tensile strength. However, Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nano-wires increase tensile strength by 73% to 130 MPa. Nano-strip, nano-prismatic, and nanostar composites outperform 3D CFs/EP by 68%, 33%, and 7%, respectively. In 3D CFs/EP composites, Co.sub.3O.sub.4 nanowires reduce wear by 50.0% and friction by 27.9%.

This study aimed to compare the 48-month clinical performance and wear of Bis-GMA-based and Bis-GMA-free nanoceramic resin composites in Class I posterior restorations. In a randomized clinical trial, 64 patients received occlusal restorations with either Zenit (Bis-GMA-based) or Neo Spectra ST (Bis-GMA-free) nanoceramic composites ( n  = 32). Clinical performance was evaluated using modified USPHS criteria at four timepoints (baseline, 12, 24, 48 months). Intraoral scans were analyzed using 3D digital superimposition techniques to assess linear and volumetric quantification of wear across follow-up periods. The results revealed that marginal discoloration was slightly more frequent in the Zenit group at 48 months, though not statistically significant. Clinical outcomes were comparable between groups. The amount of linear deviation measured in Zenit samples was higher than in Neo Spectra, whereas the volumetric deviation was greater in Neo Spectra. However, neither difference was statistically significant. Both composites demonstrated clinically acceptable performance over a 48-month period in Class I posterior restorations. Some marginal discoloration was observed with both materials. The differing matrix-to-filler ratios of the two nanoceramic resin composites may have contributed to compensating for volumetric wear. Intraoral scanning and digital analysis enable accurate, non-invasive wear monitoring. Neo Spectra ST offers superior esthetic stability and clinical handling. Neo Spectra™ ST may offer a clinically advantageous option for posterior restorations requiring esthetic durability and operator-friendly handling. Additionally, digital intraoral scanning combined with registration software provides a promising, non-invasive approach for monitoring restorative wear in clinical practice. Clinical trial registration : This study was registered on clinical trial ( http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov ) at February 4, 2021 with ID: NCT04738604.