Influence of Er:YAG Laser on Cavity Preparation and Surface Treatment in Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle A. Chinelatti ◽  
Renata P. Ramos ◽  
Daniela T. Chimello ◽  
Silmara A.M. Corona ◽  
Jesus D. Pécora ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Er:Yag Laser ◽  
Cavity Preparation ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations

scholarly journals Cavity Preparation with Er:YAG Laser or Rotary Instruments: Investigation of the Composite Resin Restorations Interface

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Rocha Gomes Torres ◽  
Maria Filomena Rocha Lima Huhtala ◽  
Maria Amélia Máximo de Araújo ◽  
Simone Cristina Teixeira ◽  
Rodrigo Máximo de Araújo
Keyword(s):  
High Speed ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Er:Yag Laser ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Nitrate Solution ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Cavity Preparation ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the sealing of composite resin restorations after cavity preparation with high speed diamonds burs or Er:YAG laser. Two different adhesive systems were used; conventional and self-etching. Seventy bovine incisors were divided into groups according to the cavity treatment (N = 10): G1 (bur + acid + Excite); G2 (bur + One Up); G3 (bur + laser + Excite); G3 (bur + laser + One Up); G4 (laser + acid + Excite); G5 (laser + One Up) and G6 (laser + Excite). Restorations were performed with Filtek Z250 3M/ESPE. The specimes were then thermocycled and placed in a vacuum machine, at a negative atmosphere of 20 inch Hg for 5 minutes, for removal of entrapped air. This procedure was followed by immersion in a 50% silver nitrate solution. The teeth were sectioned and the evaluation of the marginal leakage was performed in a light stereomicroscope. The results were submitted to the ANOVA and Tukey statistical tests. It was concluded that preparations performed with high-speed turbines and Er:YAG laser presented the same performance; preparations with Er:YAG laser submitted to acid-etching and conventional adhesive system presented high values of marginal leakage, with statistical significance; conventional and self-etching adhesive systems presented the same performance as to marginal microleakage.

Assessing Microleakage on Class V Composite Resin Restorations after Er:YAG Laser Preparation Varying the Adhesive Systems

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina Guenka Palma Dibb ◽  
Silmara Aparecida Milori Corona ◽  
Maria Cristina Borsatto ◽  
Karen Cristina Ferreira ◽  
Renata Pereira Ramos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Er:Yag Laser ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Class V ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations

Effect of Cavosurface Margin Configuration of Class V Cavity Preparations on Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjaneh Ghavamnasiri ◽  
Mahshid Bagheri
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Nonparametric Analysis ◽  
Cavity Preparation ◽  
Class V ◽  
Gingival Margin ◽  
Dye Penetration ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to compare the marginal leakage of hybrid and microfilled composite resin in Class V restorations with and without an enamel bevel. Methods and Materials Fifty-six cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 28 extracted human molars using a round bur with the dimensions of 3×2×1.5 mm. The specimens were divided into two groups of 28 based on the cavosurface margin configuration (beveled and non- beveled). Each group was then divided into two subgroups (n=14) based on the type of composite resin (microfilled and hybrid) used for restoration. After completing restorative procedure, specimens were thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine. Samples were embedded in polyester and then sectioned both mesiodistally and buccolingually. Dye penetration was observed with a stereomicroscope at 25x magnification. Statistical nonparametric analysis Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were performed to compare the data (a=0.05). Results There was no statistically significant difference between the two types of composites and two types of enamel margins with respect to microleakage (P>5%). The degree of microleakage at the gingival margin located in dentin of each group was more than that of the enamel margin (P<5%). Conclusion An enamel bevel in a Class V cavity preparation had no effect on the reduction of marginal leakage using either hybrid or microfilled composite resin. Citation Bagheri M, Ghavamnasiri M. Effect of Cavosurface Margin Configuration of Class V Cavity Preparations on Microleakage of Composite Resin Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2008 February; (9)2:122-129.

scholarly journals Effect of cavity preparation techniques and different preheating procedures on microleakage of class V resin restorations

2012 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 087-094 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emine Sirin Karaarslan ◽  
Aslihan Usumez ◽  
Bora Ozturk ◽  
Mehmet Ata Cebe
Keyword(s):  
Room Temperature ◽  
Yttrium Aluminum Garnet ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Er:Yag Laser ◽  
Single Type ◽  
Class V ◽  
Permanent Molar ◽  
Diamond Bur ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations

ABSTRACTObjectives: This study aimed to evaluate the extent of microleakage of a single type of composite resin (Clearfil Majesty Posterior, Kuraray, Osaka, Japan) following different preheating procedures in Class V cavities prepared with a diamond bur or Er:YAG (erbium: yttrium aluminum garnet) laserMethods: The study randomly divided 72 permanent molar teeth divided into eight groups (n = 9): G1: Diamond bur–unheated composite resin (room temperature-24 ºC); G2: Diamond bur–composite preheated to 37 ºC; G3: Diamond bur–composite preheated to 54 ºC; G4: Diamond bur–composite preheated to 68 ºC; G5: Er:YAG laser–unheated composite resin (room temperature-24 ºC); G6: Er:YAG laser–composite preheated to 37 ºC; G7: Er:YAG laser–composite preheated to 54 ºC; and G8: Er:YAG laser–composite preheated to 68 ºC. The specimens were subjected to a thermal cycling regimen of 5000 cycles between 5 and 55 ºC; then they were immersed in a solution of 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours. The dyed specimens were sectioned in the buccolingual direction and dye penetration was scored in a blinded manner using a five-point qualitative scale. Microleakage scores were analyzed with the Kruskall-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon testsResults: There were no statistically significant differences between the microleakages of composite applied to cavities prepared by either the Er:YAG laser or diamond bur (P>05). Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between the enamel and dentin in all restorations (P<.001). However, there were no significant differences among the preheated groups (P>05)Conclusions: For all groups, microleakage values were higher at gingival margins than at occlusal margins. The use of the Er:YAG laser at different preheating procedures did not influence the marginal sealing in Class V composite resin restorations. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:87-94)

Effect of Surface Treatment with CO2 Laser on Bond Strength in Composite Resin Restorations

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7) ◽  
pp. 428-433
Author(s):  
Pedro Henrique Cabral Oliveira ◽  
Luiz Henrique Cabral Oliveira ◽  
Márcia Regina Cabral ◽  
André Guaraci De Vito Moraes ◽  
Ricardo Sgura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Surface Treatment ◽  
Co2 Laser ◽  
Composite Resin ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Effect Of Surface ◽  
Resin Restorations

Margin quality and microleakage of Class II composite resin restorations

1987 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joo Loon Lui ◽  
Shigeyuki Masutani ◽  
James C. Setcos ◽  
Felix Lutz ◽  
Marjorie L. Swartz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Composite Resin ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Composite Resin Restorations ◽  
Resin Restorations
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document