<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="Research Article" dtd-version="1.0"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="pmc">iarjms</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="pubmed">IARJMS</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">IARJMS</journal-id><issn>2708-3594</issn></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">https://doi.org/10.47310/iarjms.2021.v02i02.027</article-id><title-group><article-title>Finite Element Fatigue Analysis in Restored Premolars with Bulk and Incremental Techniques</article-title></title-group><abstract>Aims: A premolar, a lower premolar with a class II cavity filled with&amp;nbsp;bulk resin and a lower premolar with a class II cavity filled with nanocomposite resin were prepared using an incremental technique. Introduction:The selection of restoration material in dentistry represents a challenge to obtain successful treatment. The biomechanical properties of composites influence the longevity of a restoration. Methods:&amp;nbsp;Three situations were simulated for each of the tested models by means of&amp;nbsp;the&amp;nbsp;three-dimensional finite element method: 1. Mastication (200 N axial force) in the functional area of ​​the occlusal faces; 2. Swallowing (axial force 200 N) at 5 stable points on the occlusal faces; and 3. Deflection (600 N horizontal force) at 1 point of the vestibular cusp. Results:&amp;nbsp;The&amp;nbsp;bulk resin obtained a better stress distribution under chewing, swallowing and deflection forces than the nanocomposite resin. Conclusion: The hypothesis was verified: the premolar tooth with cavity class II filled with&amp;nbsp;bulk resin showed lower stress&amp;nbsp;than&amp;nbsp;the premolar tooth with cavity class II filled with&amp;nbsp;nanocomposite resin.</abstract></article-meta></front><body /><back /></article>