Published October 30, 2025 | Version v1
Journal article Open

Decoding Occlusal Facets: Selecting the Most Suitable Restorative Material for Every Patient

  • 1. International Journal of Dental Science and Innovative Research (IJDSIR)

Description

Abstract

Tooth wear refers to irreversible loss of tooth structure due to mechanical or chemical wear that do not involve bacterial activity. Occlusal facets are hallmark features of attritional tooth wear. The choice of restorative materials plays a vital role in preserving both function and aesthetics, especially in posterior teeth where occlusal stress is significant. The aim of the study is to discuss commonly used materials such as glass ionomer cements, composites, and bonded amalgams for the early restoration of occlusal facets and prevention of further structural compromise.

Early detection of occlusal wear is essential, as it enables conservative intervention and improved long-term prognosis. The selection of restorative material should be based on several factor, including the patient’s age, esthetic expectations, presence of parafunctional habits, medical history, adhesive strategy and operator skill level. Composite resin is one of the most widely used and accepted restorative materials in modern dentistry, appreciated for its esthetics, cost-effectiveness, physical properties, and versatility. Glass ionomer cement is widely used in both adult and paediatric dentistry and has versatile applications in both restorative and preventive dentistry. For generations, dental amalgam has been a reliable restorative material. It offers several advantages, including low cost, excellent wear resistance, minimal sensitivity to moisture, high tolerance to masticatory forces, and strong compressive strength. The use of bonding agents improves retention and reduces microleakage, especially in large cavity preparations. Given the increasing prevalence and multifactorial aetiology of tooth wear, it is important to understand not only the underlying cause but also the most effective approaches for managing and restoring the worn dentition.

Files

NAVAL.pdf

Files (771.5 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:1d7efeb06a4802093d400219393c2a54
771.5 kB Preview Download

Additional details

References

  • 1. Hanif A, Rashid H, Nasim M. Tooth surface loss revisited: Classification, etiology, and management. J Res Dent. 2015 May 1;3(2):37-43. 2. Mehta SB, Loomans BA, van Sambeek RM, Pereira-Cenci T, O'Toole S. Managing tooth wear with respect to quality of life: an evidence-based decision on when to intervene. British dental journal. 2023 Mar 24;234(6):455-8. 3. Wetselaar P, Lobbezoo F. The tooth wear evaluation system: a modular clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management planning of worn dentitions. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2016 Jan;43(1):69-80. 4. Bartlett D, O'Toole S. Tooth wear and aging. Aust Dent J. 2019 Jun;64 Suppl 1:S59-S62. 5. Fathima F, Dharman S, Murugan PS. Association of occlusal wear facets in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Bioinformation. 2020 Dec 31;16(12):1060. 6. Tambrallimath V, Keshavamurthy R, Bavan SD, Patil AY, Yunus Khan TM, Badruddin IA, Kamangar S. Mechanical properties of PC-ABS-based graphene-reinforced polymer nanocomposites fabricated by FDM process. Polymers. 2021 Aug 31;13(17):2951. 7. Ferracane JL. A historical perspective on dental composite restorative materials. Journal of Functional Biomaterials. 2024 Jun 25;15(7):173. 8. Osiewicz MA, Werner A, Roeters FJ, Kleverlaan CJ. Wear of bulk-fill resin composites. Dental Materials. 2022 Mar 1;38(3):549-53. 9. Wang X, Ding T. A Review on the Current State of Microcapsule-Based Self-Healing Dental Composites. J Funct Biomater. 2024 Jun 16;15(6):165. 10. Bourgi R, Kharouf N, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Lukomska-Szymanska M, Haikel Y, Hardan L. A literature review of adhesive systems in dentistry: Key components and their clinical applications. Applied Sciences. 2024 Sep 10;14(18):8111. 11. Sofan E, Sofan A, Palaia G, Tenore G, Romeo U, Migliau G. Classification review of dental adhesive systems: from the IV generation to the universal type. Annali di stomatologia. 2017 Jul 3;8(1):1. 12. Ferrando Cascales et.al, Total rehabilitation using adhesive dental restorations in patients with severe tooth wear: A 5-year retrospective case series study. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2023 Aug 10;12(16):5222. 13. Vishwanath S, Kadandale S, kumar Kumarappan S, Ramachandran A, Unnikrishnan M, manjiri Nagesh H. Finishing and polishing of composite restoration: assessment of knowledge, attitude and practice among various dental professionals in India. Cureus. 2022 Jan 3;14(1). 14. Lopes GC, Franke M, Maia HP. Effect of finishing time and techniques on marginal sealing ability of two composite restorative materials. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 2002 Jul 1;88(1):32-6. 15. Madhyastha PS, Hegde S, Srikant N, Kotian R, Iyer SS. Effect of finishing/polishing techniques and time on surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Dental research journal. 2017 Sep;14(5):326. 16. Jung M. Surface roughness and cutting efficiency of composite finishing instruments. Operative dentistry. 1997 May 1;22(3):98-104. 17. Avsar A, Yuzbasioglu E, Sarac D. The effect of finishing and polishing techniques on the surface roughness and the color of nanocomposite resin restorative materials. Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine. 2015;24(5). 18. Attar N. The effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of composite resin materials. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2008 Mar 1;8(1):27-35. 19. Demarco FF, Collares K, Correa MB, Cenci MS, MORAES RR, Opdam NJ. Should my composite restorations last forever? Why are they failing?. Brazilian oral research. 2017 Aug 28;31:e56. 20. Nicholson JW. Maturation processes in glass-ionomer dental cements. Acta biomaterialia odontologica Scandinavica. 2018 Jan 1;4(1):63-71. 21. Bezerra IM, Brito AC, de Sousa SA, Santiago BM, Cavalcanti YW, de Almeida LD. Glass ionomer cements compared with composite resin in restoration of noncarious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon. 2020 May 1;6(5). 22. Gurgan S, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E, Oztas SS, Cakir FY. Clinical performance of a glass ionomer restorative system: a 6-year evaluation. Clinical oral investigations. 2017 Sep;21(7):2335-43. 23. Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. A review of glass-ionomer cements for clinical dentistry. Journal of functional biomaterials. 2016 Jun 28;7(3):16. 24. Kampanas NS, Antoniadou M. Glass ionomer cements for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in the geriatric patient. Journal of functional biomaterials. 2018 Jul 8;9(3):42. 25. Oz FD, Meral E, ErgIn E, Gurgan S. One-year evaluation of a new restorative glass ionomer cement for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions in patients with systemic diseases: a randomized, clinical trial. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2020 Oct 23;28:e20200311. 26. Francisconi LF, Scaffa PM, de Barros VR, Coutinho M, Francisconi PA. Glass ionomer cements and their role in the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. J Appl Oral Sci. 2009 Sep-Oct;17(5):364-9 27. Wu CH, Smales RJ. Occlusal wear of a resin-modified glass ionomer cement following three surface treatments. Clinical oral investigations. 2001 Mar;5(1):26-30. 28. Durrant L, et.al. Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement in load-bearing restorations: A systematic review. Medical Science Monitor: International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research. 2024 Feb 14;30:e943489-1. 29. Sikka N, Brizuela M. Glass ionomer cement. StatPearls. 2024 Mar 4. 30. Nazir A, Iqbal H, Mehmood A, Khan MA, Shaukat Z, Abbas Z, Kashif M. Efficacy of glass ionomer cement as pit and fissure sealant in permanent first molars. Cureus. 2024 Mar 10;16(3). 31. Worskett P. A comparative study of bonded and non-bonded amalgam restorations in general dental practice. Br Dent J. 2013 Apr;214(7):E19. 32. Vanishree HS, Shanthala BM, Bobby W. The comparative evaluation of fracture resistance and microleakage in bonded amalgam, amalgam, and composite resins in primary molars. Indian Journal of Dental Research. 2015 Sep 1;26(5):446-50. 33. Botelho MG, Jagannathan N, Brian HC, Lam OL. A systematic review of amalgam bonded restorations: in vitro and clinical findings. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2018 Aug 1;19(8):1013-24. 34. Overton JD, Vance RI. Effect of adhesive volume on the bond strength of bonded complex amalgam restorations. American Journal of Dentistry. 2005 Dec 1;18(6):320-2. 35. Kapoor B, Ahmed L. The war between amalgam and composite: A critical review. Journal of Oral Research and Review. 2021 Jul 1;13(2):133-8. 36. Chhaparwal S, Gandhi P, Ballal NV. Conservative management of tooth wear: A case series. Journal of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics. 2023 Sep 1;26(5):598-600.