Comparative Finite Element Analysis of Stress Concentration in Class V Lower Premolar Cavities Differently Restored by Adhesive Dental Materials

This study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution of different restorative materials in Class V restorations under varying occlusal loads using finite element analysis.A three-dimensional model of the mandibular first premolar was prepared using computer-aided design (version 4.0 SR8, United States), MIMICS, and 3-MATIC software (3-Matic Medical 13.0, Materialise NV, Belgium). The ANSYS 16.0 (2020) program was used to calculate and evaluate the displacement and stress distribution under four different applied forces at the buccal cusp tip (0.4 mm, right angles), ranging from 100 to 250 N in a restored Class V cavity using (glass ionomer cement [GIC], Activa BioActive-Restorative, and Cention40).The stress values in the unrestored tooth increased progressively with the applied load, ranging from 49.23 MPa at 100 N to 123.15 MPa at 250 N. Stress concentrations in the GIC restoration were lower compared with the unrestored tooth at all load levels, with values starting at 35.00 MPa at 100 N and rising to 87.51 MPa at 250 N. Among the tested materials, Cention40 composite exhibited the lowest stress concentrations especially at 100 N (28.02 MPa), suggesting better performance under high-load conditions. Activa BioActive-Restorative showed favorable stress distribution but had slightly higher stress values compared with the other materials.Statistical analysis showed no significant differences in stress distribution among the materials (<i>p</i> = 0.202). There were statistically significant differences between loads in terms of stress (<i>p</i> = 0.004). Stress values increased significantly with higher occlusal loads for all groups (<i>p</i> < 0.05).All the restorative materials exhibited comparable stress distribution patterns. Load intensity is the dominant factor influencing stress distribution in Class V restorations.Load intensity was the dominant factor influencing stress distribution in Class V restorations, while the type of restorative material played a secondary role.