ABSTRACT
Aim: The aim of the study is to compare the microleakage of three different direct restorative materials (amalgam [AA], glass ionomer cements [GICs], and Cention N [CN]) in Class II restorations using stereomicroscope. Materials and Methods: A standardized Class II cavity preparation was made involving the proximal and occlusal surfaces. All prepared samples were randomly divided into 3 experimental groups, with 10 teeth each according to the restoration material used: Group I-AA; Group II-GICs; and Group III-CN. The restored teeth were stored for 24 h in distilled water and thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5°C and 55°C with a dwell time of 30 s in each bath. Samples were immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 h. The teeth were sectioned along the mesiodistal direction. The dye penetration of the occlusal and gingival margins of each section was evaluated independently by the observer using a stereomicroscope. Results: Statistical analysis revealed lower microleakage scores in GIC and CN. Higher microleakage was observed in Group AA. Mean microleakage score of Group-I (AA) was the highest of all groups. Mean microleakage score of Group-III (CN) was the lowest of all groups. As per the critical differences (CD), the mean microleakage score of Group-III CN) was significantly lower than that of Group-I (AA), Group-II (GIC) (P < 0.01). There is no significant difference between the mean microleakage score of Group-I (AA) and Group-II (GIC). Conclusion: Out of all the restorative materials, CN a newer restorative material displayed minimum microleakage compared to AA and GICs.
ABSTRACT
The study aimed to introduce a perspective of the essential reason behind why marginal microleakage develops regardless of the composite type, the technique, or the bonding system applied, especially in gingival floor of class II cavities. Materials and Methods: Three types of composite resin materials (CharmfilTM, ParaFillTM, and ProMedica®) were used to evaluate microleakage of class II restorations using two restorative approaches. Twenty four newly extracted bicuspid teeth were divided into two main groups (n=12 each) according to the restoration technique (open or closed sandwich techniques). Teeth of each group were then divided into 3 groups (n= 4 each) according to the type of the composite resin used. The restorations were then subjected to a thermocycling process and then were immersed into methylene blue solution for 12 hours. Mesiodistal sectional cuts were made along the central grooves and assessed under stereomicroscope for marginal microleakage. The data were statistically analyzed with a p-value <0.05 considered significant. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in marginal microleakage between the three examined groups using both techniques (p>0.05). Under the microscope, the marginal microleakage was more obvious at the cervical region than at the occlusal region. Conclusion: There was no effect of the composite type or the application technique used on the occurrence of marginal microleakage. The first portion of the material applied against the cavity floor is the primary factor involved in possibly minimizing marginal microleakage.
El estudio tuvo como objetivo presentar una perspectiva de la razón esencial por la cual se desarrolla microfiltraciones independientemente del tipo de resina compuesta, el sistema de unión aplicado, especialmente en el piso gingival de cavidades de clase II. Materiales y Métodos: Se utilizaron tres tipos de resina compuesta (CharmfilTM, ParaFillTM y ProMedica®) para evaluar la microfiltración de restauraciones de clase II utilizando dos enfoques restaurativos. Veinticuatro dientes bicúspides recién extraídos se dividieron en dos grupos (n=12 cada uno) de acuerdo con la técnica de restauración (técnicas de sándwich abierto o cerrado). Los dientes de cada grupo se dividieron en 3 sub-grupos (n=4 cada uno) de acuerdo con el tipo de resina compuesta utilizada. Las restauraciones se sometieron después a un proceso de termociclado y finalmente se sumergieron en una solución de azul de metileno durante 12 horas. Se realizaron cortes en la sección mesiodistal a lo largo de los surcos centrales y se evaluaron bajo lupa para determinar la ocurrencia de microfiltración marginal. Los datos se analizaron estadísticamente con un valor de p<0,05 considerado significativo. Resultados: No hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la microfiltración marginal entre los tres grupos examinados utilizando ambas técnicas (p>0.05). Bajo la lupa la microfiltración marginal fue más obvia en la región cervical que en la región oclusal. Conclusión: No hubo efecto del tipo compuesto o la técnica de aplicación utilizada en la aparición de microfiltración marginal. La primera porción del material aplicado el piso de la cavidad es el factor principal involucrado en la posibilidad de minimizar la microfiltración marginal.
Subject(s)
Humans , Composite Resins , Dental Leakage , Dental Restoration, Permanent , Bicuspid , In Vitro TechniquesABSTRACT
Purpose: To evaluate the marginal microleakage of class II composite resin (CR) restorations due to restorative techniques. Methods: Forty human extracted premolars were assigned to 4 groups (n=10). Class II cavities were prepared (4-mm wide, 2-mm axially, with the gingival margin located 1 mm beyond the cementum-enamel-junction), and the restorative adhesive system Prime & Bond 2.1/TPH3 (Dentsply) was used. CR was inserted by the oblique incremental technique (OIT) and cured in continuous exposure. The restoratives techniques were: group 1 (control): OIT; group 2: flowable resin (1 mm) applied in the gingival wall + OIT; group 3: OIT + three pre-cured spheres inserted in the first increment of CR; and, group 4: OIT + strip of fiberglass inserted in the first increment of CR. The specimens were subjected to a thermocycling regimen of 500 cycles (1 min at 5º-37º-55ºC), coated with two layers of nail varnish up to 1 mm from the restoration margins, and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine solution for 24 h. The extension of dye penetration at the cervical wall (μm) was evaluated using an optic microscope at x40. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) (α=0.05). Results: The microleakage values were: G1: 370 μm ± 241; G2: 398 μm ± 354; G3:205 μm ± 119; and G4: 413 μm ± 340. No statistically significant differences were found among the restorative techniques (P=0.081). Conclusion: Marginal microleakage values were not influenced by the different restorative techniques tested.
Objetivo: Avaliar a microinfiltração marginal de restaurações classe II de resina composta (RC) em função de técnicas restauradoras. Metodologia: Quarenta pré-molares humanos extraídos foram divididos em 4 grupos (n=10). Cavidades classe II foram preparadas (4 mm de largura, 2 mm de altura e margem gengival localizada a 1 mm além da junção amelo-cementária, e foi usado o sistema adesivo Prime & Bond 2.1/TPH3 (Dentsply). A RC foi inserida pela técnica incremental oblíqua (OIT) e polimerizada em exposição contínua. As técnicas restauradoras foram: grupo 1 (controle): OIT; grupo 2: resina fluida (1 mm) aplicada na parede gengival + OIT; grupo 3: OIT + três esferas pré-polimerizadas no primeiro incremento de RC; e grupo 4: OIT + tira de fibra de vidro inserida no primeiro incremento de RC. Os espécimes foram submetidos à termociclagem por 500 ciclos (1 min a 5º-37º-55ºC), cobertos com duas camadas de esmalte até 1 mm das margens da restauração e imersos em solução de fucsina básica a 0,5% por 24 h. A extensão da penetração do corante na parede cervical (μm) foi avaliada com microscópio ótico (x40). Os dados foram analisados por ANOVA (α=0,05). Resultados: Os valores de microinfiltração foram: G1: 370 μm ± 241; G2: 398 μm ± 354; G3: 205 μm ± 119 e G4: 413 μm ± 340. Não houve diferença estatisticamente significativa entre as técnicas restauradoras (P=0,081). Conclusão: Os valores de microinfiltração marginal não foram influenciados pelas diferentes técnicas restauradoras neste estudo.
Subject(s)
Humans , Dental Restoration Failure , In Vitro Techniques , Dental Leakage , Composite Resins , Dental Restoration, Permanent/methodsABSTRACT
O presente trabalho teve por meta revisar a literatura pertinente à restauração com materiais ionoméricos na prática odontológica. Foram considerados aspectos relativos como, características e propriedades físico-química dos ionômeros de vidro restauradores, assim como o conhecimento atual de técnicas alternativa para aplicação destes materiais.
The present work had for goal to revise the pertinent literature tho the restoration with ionomeric materials in dental practice. Relative aspects were considered such as, physiochemical characterístics and properties of the glass restorers' ionomer, as current knowledge of alternative techniques for application of these materials.
Subject(s)
Dental Leakage , Dental Materials , Esthetics, Dental , Glass Ionomer CementsABSTRACT
This study evaluated the marginal microleakage of five single step adhesives. Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of the single step adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z-250 (Group 1), AQ Bond/Metafil CX (Group 2), One-Up Bond F/Palfique Toughwell (Group 3), Futurabond/Admira (Group 4), Xeno III/Spectrum TPH (Group 5). The restored teeth were thermocycled. Microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye solution. The teeth were bisected buccolingually and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney tests. The results of this study were as follows; 1. Microleakage of enamel margins in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 1, 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05). 2. Microleakage of dentin margins in group 1 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 5, and that in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05). 3. Dentin marginal microleakage was higher than enamel marginal microleakage in all experimental groups. In conclusion, Prompt L-Pop showed the least leakage at enamel margin, and AQ Bond showed at dentin margin in this study. Marginal miroleakage in dentin was higher than that in enamel.
Subject(s)
Humans , Adhesives , Composite Resins , Dental Enamel , Dentin , Methylene Blue , Molar , ToothABSTRACT
This study investigated the influence of IRM on marginal microleakage of 5th generation adhesives. Class V cavities with gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 60 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into six groups. Group 1 and 4 received no temporary restoration with IRM. Group 2 and 5 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/1g). Group 3 and 6 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/2g). The temporary restorations were removed mechanically with an ultrasonic scaler after one-week storage in distilled water. The cavities were restored using one of two adhesives and composites; Single Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 1, 2 and 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4, 5 and 6). Following one day storage in distilled water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles(between 5degrees C and 55degrees C) and immersed in 2% methylene blue for dye penetration testing. The results were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test at a significance level of 0.05. The results of this study were as follows: 1. Ranking of mean microleakage scores at the enamel margins was Group 10.05). 4. At the dentin margins, the microleakage of the group not pretreated with IRM was lower than that of the group pretreated with IRM. And the microleakage of UniFil Bond was lower than that of Single Bond. 5. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentin margins of each groups, Group 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 at dentin margin were higher microleakage than those at enamel margin. There were significant difference between enamel and dentin microleakage of Group 2 and 3(p<0.05).
Subject(s)
Humans , Adhesives , Dental Enamel , Dentin , Methylene Blue , Molar , Tooth , Ultrasonics , WaterABSTRACT
This study evaluated the microleakage performance of four self-etcing primer adhesives(Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil Liner Bond 2, UniFil Bond, and FL Bond) and one self-etching adhesive(Prompt L-Pop). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of five adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z 250(Group 1), Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil AP-X(Group 2), Clearfil Liner Bond 2/Clearfil AP-X(Group 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4), and FL Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 5). Following one day storage in room temperature water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5degrees C and 55degrees C. Marginal microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye. After 24 hours, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests. The results of this study were as follows; 1. The microleakges at both enamel and dentinal margins were the lowest in group 4, increasing among groups in the following order: group 2, follwed by group 5, follwed by group 1, and the highest in group 3. 2. At the enamel margins, the microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than those of groups 2, 4 and 5(p0.05).