* denotes required field

Your Name: *



Gender: *

Personal Email: *

This will be your username

Password: *

Display Name: *

This will be what others see in social areas of the site.

Address: *










Phone Number:

School/University: *

Graduation Date: *

Date of Birth: *

ASDA Membership No:





Hi returning User! please login with Facebook credentials where Facebook Username is same as THENEXTDDS Username.




Comments (0)

Intracoronal Restorations - Part I

As patients seek aesthetic treatment that is biocompatible, durable, and safe, the utilization of composite resin for the direct restoration of the posterior dentition has continued to increase.  In the past, composite resins were often affected by factors (eg, low wear resistance, color variation, low flexural strength) that limited their use to smaller restorations.  Newer formulations, however, have significantly enhanced the physical, mechanical, and optical properties that have increased their use in medium to larger restorations.

*Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry and Biomaterials, University of Texas Health Science Center Dental Branch, Houston, TX; private practice, Institute of Aesthetic and Restorative Dentistry, Houston, TX.


Learning Objectives:

Upon completion of this video, the viewer should:

  • Understand consideration factors for the utilization of direct composite restorations.
  • Understand how to use direct composite resin as an alternative to other biomaterials.


Related Reading:

  1. Bouschlicher MR, Cobb DS, Boyer DB. Radiopacity of compomers, flowable and conventional resin composites for posterior restorations. Oper Dent 1999;24(1):20-25.
  2. Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent 1997;25(6):435-440.
  3. Venhoven BA, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Polymerization contraction and conversion of light-curing bisGMA-based methacrylateresins. Biomaterials 1993;14(11):871-875.
  4. Quellet D. Considerations and techniques for multiple bulk-fill direct posterior composites. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1995;16(12):1212,1214-1216.
  5. Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res 1987;66(11):1636-1639.
  6. Feilzer AJ, Dooren LH, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Influence of light intensity on polymerization shrinkage and integrity of restoration-cavity interface. Eur J Oral Sci 1995;103(5):322-326.
  7. Bausch JR, de Lange K, Davidson CL, et al. Clinical significance of polymerization shrinkage of composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48(1):59-67.
  8. Asmussen E. Composite restorative resins. Composition versus wall-to-wall polymerization contraction. Acta Odontol Scand 1975;33(97):337-343.
  9. Liebenberg WH. Successive cusp build-up: An improved placement technique for posterior direct resin restorations. J Can Dent Assoc 1996;62(6):501-507.
  10. Robbins JW, Fasbinder DJ, Burgess JO. Posterior inlays and onlays. In: Fundamentals of Operative Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach, Carol Stream, IL: Quintessence Publishing; 1996:229-249.
Sorry, your current access level does not permit you to view this page.