Protective Effect of Resin Coating on the Microleakage of Class V Restorations Following Treatment with Carbamide Peroxide In Vitro

2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 634-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Yu ◽  
Q. Li ◽  
T. Attin ◽  
Y. Wang

Clinical Relevance Carbamide peroxide treatment increased the microleakage of Class V conventional glass-ionomer cement and resin modified glass-ionomer cement restorations. The resin coating is an effective method to avoid bleaching-induced microleakage without affecting the bleaching outcome.

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-91
Author(s):  
Thesi Kurnia Ayudia ◽  
Kuswardani Susari Putri ◽  
Ivony Fitria

Microleakage defined as the clinically undetectable passage of bacteria, fluids, molecules or ions between a cavity wall and the restorative material. Microleakage tends to occur in Class V cavities. It is caused by  marginal adaptation  which is more difficult in class  V cavities. Microfiller composite resin is developed and indicated for areas that not require a large pressure. As the development of dental materials, it has been developed a composite resin base material that is known as resin-modified glass ionomer cement. This material has purposed to reduce the limitation of conventional glass ionomer cement and take the advantage of the composite resin material. The aim of this study was   to evaluate microleakage difference of microfiler composite resin restoration with resin-modified glass ionomer cement restorations in class V anterior teeth cavities.  The methode of this  study used experimental laboratory through in vitro process . Thirty two class V cavities were prepared on labial surfaces of extracted human anterior teeth. Samples were divided into two groups. Group I included sixteen samples that have had   restorated with microfiller composite. Group II included sixteen samples that have had restorated with resin-modified glass ionomer cement. The samples were immersed into aquabides solution for 24 hours. After that, the samples were immersed into 1% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. All samples sectioned longitudinally and analyzed for microleakage as dye penetration using a stereomicroscope. Student t-test were used for statistical analysis. The resulting data showed no significantly difference between two groups. Key Word : Microleakage, microfiller composite resin, resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC), class V cavities.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2012 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Koubi ◽  
H. Elmerini ◽  
G. Koubi ◽  
H. Tassery ◽  
J. Camps

This study compared thein vitromarginal integrity of open-sandwich restorations based on aged calcium silicate cement versus resin-modified glass ionomer cement. Class II cavities were prepared on 30 extracted human third molars. These teeth were randomly assigned to two groups () to compare a new hydraulic calcium silicate cement designed for restorative dentistry (Biodentine, Septodont, Saint Maur des Fossés, France) with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement (Ionolux, Voco, Cuxhaven, Germany) in open-sandwich restorations covered with a light-cured composite. Positive () and negative () controls were included. The teeth simultaneously underwent thermocycling and mechanocycling using a fatigue cycling machine (1,440 cycles, 5–55°C; 86,400 cycles, 50 N/cm2). The specimens were then stored in phosphate-buffered saline to simulate aging. After 1 year, the teeth were submitted to glucose diffusion, and the resulting data were analyzed with a nonparametric Mann-Whitney test. The Biodentine group and the Ionolux group presented glucose concentrations of 0.074 ± 0.035 g/L and 0.080 ± 0.032 g/L, respectively. No statistically significant differences were detected between the two groups. Therefore, the calcium silicate-based material performs as well as the resin-modified glass ionomer cement in open-sandwich restorations.


2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine O. Geerts ◽  
Laurence Seidel ◽  
Adelin I. Albert ◽  
Audrey M. Gueders

This study was designed to evaluate microleakage that appeared on Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) restorations. Sixty class V cavities () were cut on thirty extracted third molars, which were randomly allocated to three experimental groups. All the buccal cavities were pretreated with polyacrylic acid, whereas the lingual cavities were treated with three one-step Self-Etch adhesives, respectively, Xeno III (Dentsply Detrey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), iBond exp (Heraeus Kulzer gmbH & Co. KG, Hanau, Germany), and Adper Prompt-L-Pop (3M ESPE AG, Dental products Seefeld, Germany). All cavities were completely filled with RMGIC, teeth were thermocycled for 800 cycles, and leakage was evaluated. Results were expressed as means standard deviations (SDs). Microleakage scores were analysed by means of generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) assuming an ordinal logistic link function. All results were considered to be significant at the 5% critical level (). The results showed that bonding RMGIC to dentin with a Self-Etch adhesive rather than using polyacrylic acid did not influence microleakage scores (), except for one tested Self-Etch adhesive, namely, Xeno III (). Nevertheless, our results did not show any significant difference between the three tested Self-Etch adhesive systems. In conclusion, the pretreatment of dentin with Self-Etch adhesive system, before RMGIC filling, seems to be an alternative to the conventional Dentin Conditioner for the clinicians as suggested by our results (thermocycling) and others (microtensile tests).


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (33) ◽  
pp. 2769-2772
Author(s):  
Arjun Sajjeev ◽  
Ashwini Tumkur Shivkumar ◽  
Sowmya Halasabalu Kalgeri

BACKGROUND Marginal integrity of glass ionomer as a restorative material is an important factor for the longevity of the restoration. Class V and cervical abrasions are the most critical and challenging lesions for restorations. The choice of material for restoring class V and cervical abrasions is glass ionomer cement (GIC). Sensitivity to moisture contact during the early setting stages is the drawback of GIC. To overcome the drawback, modifications of glass ionomer cement were made by the addition of chitosan. Chitosan (CH) is a natural linear polysaccharide obtained partially and fully by deacetylated chitin compounds, which are found in crab and shrimp shells, with properties like nontoxicity, biodegradability, bioadhesive, biocompatibility, and biorenewabilty which has led to its use in various fields. Thus, this study intended to evaluate the microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement and chitosan modified glass ionomer cement using a spectrophotometer. METHODS 60 teeth extracted for orthodontic propose were selected for the study and randomly divided into two groups, class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface and samples were restored with conventional glass ionomer cement and chitosan modified glass ionomer cement respectively, teeth were immersed in 0.5 % methylene blue for 24 hours and assessed using a spectrophotometer. RESULTS The data were analysed using the Unpaired T - test, and with statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) for Windows, version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., USA). The confidence interval was set at 95 % and values of P < 0.05 were interpreted as statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS The study concluded that the addition of chitosan improves the mechanical properties of conventional glass ionomer cement, and a spectrophotometer can be used as a better evaluation tool in assessing microleakage. KEY WORDS Chitosan Modified GIC, Glass Ionomer Cement, Microleakage, Spectrophotometer


2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeinab M. Zaki ◽  
Maha A. Niazy ◽  
Mohamed H. Zaazou ◽  
Shaymaa M. Nagi ◽  
Dina W. Elkassas

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of Nano-hydroxyapatite-modified conventional glass ionomer cement (NHA-GIC) and Nano-hydroxyapatite-modified resin-modified glass ionomer cement (NHA-RMGIC) with conventional glass ionomer (CGIC) and resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC) in the treatment of caries class V cavities. Sixty patients with at least two cervical caries lesions participated in this study. A total of 120 class V cavities were prepared and then restored using different restorative materials. Restorations were clinically evaluated according to modified United States Public Health Service criteria at baseline and after 3, 6 and 9 months. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the clinical performance of the different restorative materials at any of the follow-up periods. However, throughout the study period there was a statistically significant change in the color match, surface texture and marginal integrity in NHA-GIC. A statistically significant change in the surface texture and marginal integrity was found in GIC. On the other hand, there was only a statistically significant change in surface texture in NHA-RMGIC. Conclusions All tested restorative materials, control (CGIC and RMGIC) as well as experimental (NHA-GIC and NHA-RMGIC), exhibited comparable clinical performance after 9 months follow-up.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document