Clinical RelevanceOne of the advantages reported for indirect composite restorations is the reduction of polymerization shrinkage, which could produce better marginal sealing. Although sealing of cervical enamel margins was slightly better for the indirect systems used, no difference between indirect and direct restorations was found for cervical margins in cementum/dentin. SUMMARYThis study compared microleakage between indirect composite inlays and direct composite restorations. Forty-eight standard inlay MOD cavities, with cervical margins located either in enamel or dentin, were prepared in extracted human third molars. The specimens were randomly divided into 3 groups (n=16). In the control group, the cavities were restored with the composite Filtek Z250 (3M ESPE). For the experimental groups, indirect restorations were made with the Artglass (Heraeus-Kulzer) or Belleglass HP (Kerr Laboratories) systems and cemented with the dual curing cement RelyX ARC (3M ESPE). The adhesive system Single Bond (3M ESPE) was applied on all groups. The specimens were submitted to thermolcycling, coated with nail varnish, then immersed in 2% basic fuchsine aqueous solution for 24 hours. The teeth were then sectioned and leakage scores were evaluated (40x), based on a standard ranking. Data were submitted to statistical analysis (Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests) with a 95% confidence level. No statistical difference was found between substrates (p=0.595), and the materials performed similarly in dentin (p=0.482). Direct restorations showed higher leakage than indirect restorations at the enamel margins (p=0.004). Within the limitations of this experimental design, overall leakage was similar between both substrates, while the indirect systems provided a better sealing than direct composites only in enamel.
The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the flexural strength (FS) and modulus of elasticity (ME) of three microhybrid resins (Filtek Z250; Charisma; P60) and one submicrohybrid resin (Concept) using LED or halogen light polymerization. Twenty specimens (25x2x2 mm) per tested material were prepared and polymerized using a halogen or LED curing unit and stored in distilled water. FS and ME tests were performed on an Instron universal testing machine (0.75mm/min). ANOVA and multiple comparisons (SNK) showed that the two polymerization systems resulted in no significant differences (p>0.05) in the FS of Charisma and Filtek Z250. The two curing systems also produced similar results in the ME of Charisma, Concept and Filtek Z250. Significant differences were found in FS and ME, with the halogen curing light system showing better results than the LED system. The LED LCU systems did not exhibit a superior performance in our investigation of any of the composite resins, in terms of flexural strength and modulus of elasticity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.