Zahnmedizin up2date, Table of Contents Zahnmedizin up2date 2020; 14(02): 127-143DOI: 10.1055/a-1123-5856 Zahnerhaltung, Prävention und Restauration Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New YorkSubgingival = suboptimal? Die Proximal Box Elevation zur Therapie tiefer Defekte Anne-Katrin Lührs Recommend Article Abstract Buy Article All articles of this category Tiefe subgingivale Defekte sind primär nicht durch indirekte Adhäsivrestaurationen versorgbar. Die Proximal Box Elevation (PBE), die durch Einbringen einer Kompositstufe die Präparationsgrenze von sub- nach supragingival verlegt, ermöglicht das spätere adhäsive Zementieren unter absoluter Trockenlegung. Dieser Beitrag präsentiert einen Überblick über die aktuelle wissenschaftliche Literatur und illustriert das klinische Vorgehen mit Fallbeispielen. Schlüsselwörter SchlüsselwörterProximal Box Elevation - tiefe approximale Defekte - Kompositstufe - Kastenelevation Full Text References Literatur 1 Hansen EK, Asmussen E. Visible-light curing units: correlation between depth of cure and distance between exit window and resin surface. Acta Odontol Scand 1997; 55: 162-166 2 Dietschi D, Spreafico R. Current clinical concepts for adhesive cementation of tooth-colored posterior restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998; 10: 47-54 3 Frese C, Wolff D, Staehle HJ. Proximal box elevation with resin composite and the dogma of biological width: clinical R2-technique and critical review. Oper Dent 2014; 39: 22-31 doi:10.2341/13-052-T 4 Veneziani M. Adhesive restorations in the posterior area with subgingival cervical margins: new classification and differentiated treatment approach. Eur J Esthet Dent 2010; 5: 50-76 5 Jacker-Guhr S, Lührs AK, Herrmann P. Think outside the box! – Proximal-Box-Elevation zum Management tiefer approximaler Läsionen. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 2018; 73: 248-258 6 Roggendorf MJ, Krämer N, Dippold C. et al. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of resin composite inlays in vitro. J Dent 2012; 40: 1068-1073 doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2012.08.019 7 Frankenberger R, Hehn J, Hajtó J. et al. Effect of proximal box elevation with resin composite on marginal quality of ceramic inlays in vitro. Clin Oral Investig 2013; 17: 177-183 doi:10.1007/s00784-012-0677-5 8 Müller V, Friedl KH, Friedl K. et al. Influence of proximal box elevation technique on marginal integrity of adhesively luted Cerec inlays. Clin Oral Investig 2017; 21: 607-612 doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1927-8 9 Ilgenstein I, Zitzmann NU, Bühler J. et al. Influence of proximal box elevation on the marginal quality and fracture behavior of root-filled molars restored with CAD/CAM ceramic or composite onlays. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 1021-1028 doi:10.1007/s00784-014-1325-z 10 Zaruba M, Göhring TN, Wegehaupt FJ. et al. Influence of a proximal margin elevation technique on marginal adaptation of ceramic inlays. Acta Odontol Scand 2013; 71: 317-324 doi:10.3109/00016357.2012.680905 11 Spreafico R, Marchesi G, Turco G. et al. Evaluation of the in vitro effects of cervical marginal relocation using composite resins on the marginal quality of CAD/CAM crowns. J Adhes Dent 2016; 18: 355-362 doi:10.3290/j.jad.a36514 12 Grubbs TD, Vargas M, Kolker J. et al. Efficacy of direct restorative materials in proximal box elevation on the margin quality and fracture resistance of molars restored with CAD/CAM onlays. Oper Dent 2019; 13 Aravamudhan K, Rakowski D, Fan PL. Variation of depth of cure and intensity with distance using LED curing lights. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 988-994 14 Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Scribante A. et al. Effect of light-tip distance on the shear bond strengths of composite resin. Angle Orthod 2005; 75: 386-391 15 Catelan A, de Araújo LS, da Silveira BC. et al. Impact of the distance of light curing on the degree of conversion and microhardness of a composite resin. Acta Odontol Scand 2015; 73: 298-301 doi:10.3109/00016357.2014.946965 16 Ilie N, Keßler A, Durner J. Influence of various irradiation processes on the mechanical properties and polymerisation kinetics of bulk-fill resin based composites. J Dent 2013; 41: 695-702 doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2013.05.008 17 Köken S, Juloski J, Sorrentino R. et al. Marginal sealing of relocated cervical margins of mesio-occluso-distal overlays. J Oral Sci 2018; 60: 460-468 doi:10.2334/josnusd.17-0331 18 Da Silva Gonçalves D, Cura M, Ceballos L. et al. Influence of proximal box elevation on bond strength of composite inlays. Clin Oral Investig 2017; 21: 247-254 doi:10.1007/s00784-016-1782-7 19 Ferrari M, Koken S, Grandini S. et al. Influence of cervical margin relocation (CMR) on periodontal health: 12-month results of a controlled trial. J Dent 2018; 69: 70-76 doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2017.10.008 20 Bresser RA, Gerdolle D, van den Heijkant IA. et al. Up to 12 years clinical evaluation of 197 partial indirect restorations with deep margin elevation in the posterior region. J Dent 2019; 91: 103227 doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2019.103227 21 Bertoldi C, Monari E, Cortellini P. et al. Clinical and histological reaction of periodontal tissues to subgingival resin composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig 2020; 24: 1001-1011 doi:10.1007/s00784-019-02998-7 22 Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R. et al. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 2004; 83: 454-458 23 Perdigão J, Loguercio AD. Universal or multi-mode adhesives: why and how? IAAD Working Instructions. J Adhes Dent 2014; 2: 193-194 doi:10.3290/j.jad.a31871 24 Carrilho E, Cardoso M, Marques Ferreira M. et al. 10-MDP based dental adhesives: adhesive interface characterization and adhesive stability-a systematic review. Materials (Basel) 2019; 12: pii:E790 doi:10.3390/ma12050790 25 Frankenberger R, Reinelt C, Petschelt A. et al. Operator vs. material influence on clinical outcome of bonded ceramic inlays. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 960-968 doi:10.1016/j.dental.2009.02.002 26 Rathke A, Tymina Y, Haller B. Effect of different surface treatments on the composite-composite repair bond strength. Clin Oral Investig 2009; 13: 317-323 doi:10.1007/s00784-008-0228-2 27 Eliasson ST, Tibballs J, Dahl JE. Effect of different surface treatments and adhesives on repair bond strength of resin composites after one and 12 months of storage using an improved microtensile test method. Oper Dent 2014; 39: E206-E216 doi:10.2341/12-429-L 28 Altinci P, Mutluay M, Tezvergil-Mutluay A. Repair bond strength of nanohybrid composite resins with a universal adhesive. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand 2017; 4: 10-19 doi:10.1080/23337931.2017.1412262 29 Gutierrez NC, Moecke SE, Caneppele TM. et al. Bond strength of composite resin restoration repair: influence of silane and adhesive systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019; 20: 880-886 30 Hannig C, Hahn P, Thiele PP. et al. Influence of different repair procedures on bond strength of adhesive filling materials to etched enamel in vitro. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 800-807 31 Chen L, Hammond BD, Alex G. et al. Effect of silane contamination on dentin bond strength. J Prosthet Dent 2017; 117: 438-443 doi:10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.06.021 32 Zaruba M, Wegehaupt FJ, Attin T. Comparison between different flow application techniques: SDR vs. flowable composite. J Adhes Dent 2013; 15: 115-121 doi:10.3290/j.jad.a28672 33 Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, de Boer T. et al. Voids and porosities in class I micropreparations filled with various resin composites. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 9-14 34 Moosavi H, Maleknejad F, Forghani M. et al. Evaluating resin-dentin bond by microtensile bond strength test: effects of various resin composites and placement techniques. Oper Dent J 2015; 9: 409-413 doi:10.2174/1874210601509010409
