An In-vitro Evaluation of Microleakage at the Cervical Margin Between Two Different Class II Restorative Techniques using Dye Penetration Method. | [Journal of College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP • 2016]

Author(s):

1. Noor Ul Ain Jawaed: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan

2. Syed Yawar Ali Abidi: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan

3. Fazal Ur Rehman Qazi: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan

4. Shahbaz Ahmed: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan

Abstract:

Objective: To evaluate the coronal microleakage of packable composite using conventional incremental and posterior bulk fill flowable composite using Smart Dentine Replacement Single Step technique in the cervical margins of class II cavities in dentine using the dye penetration method. Study Design: In-vitro Interventional study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences (DIKIOHS), Karachi, from November 2012 to April 2013. Methodology: One hundred and twenty extracted teeth (molars and premolars) were collected and randomly divided into two experimental groups (n=60 each) and were stored in normal saline until used. Fractured samples were excluded. Standardized class II proximal box only cavities were prepared and restored with conventional methacrylate based composite using incremental technique (Group A, n=40) and low stress methacrylate resin based composite SDR using single step technique (Group B, n=40). Samples were sectioned horizontally below the cervical margins and specimen disks were prepared. The specimens were thermocycled and sealed with acid resistant varnish leaving a 1-mm interface around cervical margin and immersed in 2% methylene blue buffered solution for 24 hours. Leakage was scored 0 - 4 and measured in mm. It washed and sectioned to evaluate under stereomicroscope. Results: Mean penetration was 2.4280 ±0.79 mm for Group A and 1.015 ±0.45 mm for Group B (p < 0.001). Maximum dye penetration score for group A was 4 and group B was 3. Conclusion: SDR technique in combination with total etch technique at the cervical margin of class II restorations improved the marginal seal, when were placed in dentine and thermocycled.

Page(s): 748-752

DOI: DOI not available

Published: Journal: Journal of College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP, Volume: 26, Issue: 9, Year: 2016

Keywords:

Dental composite Microleakage Dye penetration method Smart dentine replacement SDR composite

References:

[1] OpdamNJ,BronkhorstEM,LoomansBA,HuysmansMC, 2010.12-year survival of composite vs. amalgam restorations,J Dent Res 89 1063 -7

[2] ManhartJ,ChenH,HammG,HickelR, 2004.Review of the clinical survival of direct and indirect restorations in posterior teeth of the permanent dentition,Oper Dent 29 481 -508

[3] Garcia-GodoyF,KramerN,FeilzerAJ,FrankenbergerR, 2010.Long-term degradation of enamel and dentin bonds: 6-year results in-vitro vs,Dent Mater 26 1113 -8

[4] FrankenbergerR,ReineltC,PetscheltA, 2009.Operator vs. material influence on clinical outcome of bonded ceramic inlays,Dent Mater 25 960 -8

[5] PeumansM,De MunckJ,Van LanduytKL,PoitevinA,LambrechtsP,Van MeerbeekB., 2012.A 13-year clinical evaluation of two three-step etch-and-rinse adhesives in non-carious class-V lesions,Clin Oral Investig 16 129 -37

[6] KrämerN,ReineltC,García-GodoyF,TaschnerM,PetscheltA,FrankenbergerR, 2009.Nanohybrid composite vs. fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities: Clinical and microscopic results after 2 years,Am J Dent 22 228 -34

[7] KramerN,Garcia-GodoyF,FrankenbergerR, 2005.Evaluation of resin composite materials. Part II. In-vivo investigations,Am J Dent 18 75 -81

[8] Van DijkenJW, 2010.Durability of resin composite restorations in high. C-factor cavities: A 12-year follow-up,J Dent 38 469 -74

[9] BortolottoT,OnisorI,KrejciI., 2007.Proximal direct composite restorations and chairside CAD/CAM inlays: Marginal adaptation of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel conditioning,Clin Oral Investig 11 35 -43

[10] FrankenbergerR,TayFR, 2005.Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: Effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations,Dent Mater 21 397 -412

[11] Van MeerbeekB,YoshiharaK,YoshidaY,MineA,DeMunckJ, 2011.State-of-the-art of self-etch adhesives,Dent Mater 27 17 -28

[12] Van MeerbeekB,Van LanduytKL,De Munck, 2005.Techniquesensitivity of contemporary adhesives,Dent Mater J 24 1 -13

[13] PeumansM,De MunckJ,Van LanduytKL,PoitevinA,LambrechtsP, 2010.Eight-year clinical-evaluation of a 2-step self-etch adhesive with and without-selective enamel etching,Dent Mater 26 1176 -84

[14] ChersoniS,AcquavivaGL,PratiC,FerrariM,GrandiniS,PashleyDH, 2005.In-vivo fluid movement through dentin adhesives in endodontically treated teeth,J Dent Res 84 223 -7

[15] TayFR,PashleyDH,SuhB,CarvalhoR,MillerM, 2004.Single-step, self-etch adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. Part 1. Bond strength and morphologic evidence,Am J Dent 17 271 -8

[16] TayFR,PashleyDH,Garcia-GodoyF,YiuCK, 2004.Single-step,selfetch adhesives behave as permeable membranes after polymerization. Part II. Silver tracer penetration evidence,Am J Dent 17 315 -22

[17] BurgessJ,CakirD, 2010.Comparative properties of low-shrinkage composite resins,Compend Contin Educ Dent 2 10 -5

Citations

Downloads

Views