ABSTRACT
Aim: To compare the microleakage of Filtek bulk fill posterior and Beautifil II LS composites in Class II cavities using stereomicroscope. Materials and Methods: A total of 34 extracted teeth were randomly divided into two groups. Teeth were prepared and mounted on a plaster block. In each tooth, Class II cavities were prepared, following which the cavities were etched and bonded. In Group I, 17 teeth were restored with Filtek bulk fill posterior composite in bulk fill technique and in Group II, 17 teeth were restored with Beautifil II LS following manufacture's instructions. The samples were then thermocycled and then the tooth were immersed in 1% methylene blue for 24 h and were divided into two halves mesiodistally using a diamond disc at low speed. Then, all the sections were observed under a stereomicroscope at ×10 magnification. Results: Mann-Whitney U-test displayed a statistically significant higher mean rank among Filtek bulk fill group (mean rank = 23.09) when compared to Beautifil II LS composite group (mean rank = 11.91). Conclusion: The study concluded that in Class II restorations, Beautifil II LS showed significantly less microleakage than Filtek bulk fill posterior.
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: One of the important goals of root canal therapy is disinfection aided by irrigation and intracanal medicaments. Commonly used nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents have shown anti-bacterial activity, thus, when used as intracanal medicaments, nonantibiotic agents have the potential to provide anti-inflammatory, local analgesic, and anti-bacterial activity. AIM: The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the anti-bacterial efficiency of anti-inflammatory nonantibiotics ibuprofen and diclofenac, and routinely used intracanal dressing calcium hydroxide (Ca[OH]2), against Enterococcus faecalis, in an endodontic model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 76 single-rooted mandibular premolar teeth were decoronated and instrumented up to F4-ProTaper rotary. Apical foramen was sealed with composite resin, and all external surfaces made impermeable with nail varnish, except for coronal access. Roots were autoclaved (121°C for 20 min), placed in Eppendorf tubes, and contaminated with E. faecalis for 14 days. Colony-forming unit (CFU) counts were taken before (CFU-1), and after intracanal medication (CFU-2) by paper point sampling. Test medicaments (Group-1: ibuprofen, Group-2: diclofenac, Group-3: Ca[OH]2) were mixed with distilled water (1:1 w/v), placed into root canals, temporarily sealed, and incubated (37°C; 7 days). Group-4 received no medicament (control). Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA was used to compare the four groups and Mann-Whitney U-test for pair-wise comparisons. RESULTS: Within the limitations of the study, anti-inflammatory nonantibiotics (ibuprofen; diclofenac) were shown to have anti-bacterial effect against E. faecalis. CONCLUSION: Since nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have an anti-bacterial effect, it is possible to replace Ca(OH)2 with NSAIDs, or even combine them to form a cocktail of local disinfectants to optimize canal disinfection.
ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: Being integral to root canal therapy, obturation can be performed adequately only after the removal of intracanal medicament. One technique involves the use of chelating agents such as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) and citric acid. Etidronic acid, a relatively new chelator, has smear layer removal ability and lesser dentinal erosion. It is untested in calcium hydroxide (Ca[OH]2) medicament removal. AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of irrigation protocols (EDTA, citric acid, and etidronate) in Ca(OH)2 removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five single-rooted mandibular premolars were decoronated, instrumented, and filled with Ca(OH)2. After 7 days incubation, Ca(OH)2 was removed by three irrigation protocols (Group-I: 17% EDTA; Group-II: 10% citric acid; and Group-III: 18% etidronate). Roots were split and analyzed (scanning electron microscope, ×1500). Chelator solution pH was tested. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Group-III (coronal-third) and Groups-I and II (middle-third) had highest cleanliness scores; Groups-II and III (apical-third) had lowest scores. Comparing the thirds, all groups showed difference in scores. pH of Groups-I, II, and III were 6.8, 1.4, and 0.3, respectively. CONCLUSION: The solution pH of citric acid and etidronate impacts their Ca(OH)2 removal efficiency in different ways: the highly alkaline pH of Ca(OH)2 increases citric acid pH toward neutrality, where it becomes an inefficient chelator; on the contrary, high acidity of etidronate compensates for its weaker chelation. Etidronate may not require 5 min duration for Ca(OH)2 removal due to the likelihood of dentinal erosion.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The use of resin-modified glass Ionomer cement in sandwich technique is widely practiced with the advent of various newer generation of composites the bond between resin-modified glass Ionomer and these resins should be validated. This study is done to evaluate the interfacial microgaps between different types of liners and dentin, liners and composite (Filtek p60 [FLp60]) using scanning electron microscope (SEM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized Class V preparations were performed in buccal/lingual surfaces of 30 caries, crack and defect-free extracted human third molars. The prepared teeth were divided into three groups. Group I: Single bond (SB), Group II: SB + synergy flow, Group III: SB + vitrebond. They were restored with composite resin FLp60, according to the manufacturer instructions. The SB + vitrebond, cross-sectioned through the canter of the restoration. The specimens were fixed, dehydrated, polished, and processed for SEM. The internal adaptation of the materials to the axial wall was analyzed under SEM with ×1000 magnification. RESULTS: The data obtained were analyzed with nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis, P < 0.05). flowable composite or resin-modified glass ionomer applied in conjunction with adhesive resulted in statistically wider microgaps than occurred when the dentin was only hybridized prior to the restoration. CONCLUSION: Hybridization of dentin only provides superior sealing of the dentin-restoration interface than does flowable resin or resin-modified glass ionomer.
