A comparative study of microleakage between giomer and ormocer restoration in class I cavity of first permanent premolar teeth in vivo

Abstract

<p class="Abstract">This study was performed to compare the marginal microleakage of ormocer restorative material with that of giomer in vivo. Forty Class I cavities were prepared in non-carious permanent premolar teeth from 10 patients. Twenty cavities were filled with giomer and the remaining 20 cavities were filled by ormocer restorative materials. After one month, teeth were extracted, immersed in rhodamine dye solution, and then longitudinally bisected to assess the degree of dye penetration by stereoscopy. Furthermore, the gap between the dental material and tooth tissue were observed by the scanning electron microscope. The results showed that no microleakage (score 0) was detected in 15 ormocer and 5 giomer restorations. The remaining restorations were associated with dye penetration which was due to gap formation as seen in stereoscopic and scanning electron microscopic observations. The differences between ormocer and giomer restorative materials in respect to dye penetration were statistically significant. It can be concluded that ormocer restorative material shows less microleakage than that of giomer.</p>

Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Bioactive, Ormocer, and Conventional GIC Restorative Materials in Primary Molars: An In Vitro Study Microleakage of Three Restorative Materials

“…Admira with an ormocer-based bonding agent exhibited the least microleakage as compared to other groups [31]. Similarly, Shathi et al showed less microleakage with ormocer when compared to giomer [34].…”

Innovative Adhesive Systems for Dental Giomer Restorations

“…The dye penetration method is an established method for the determination of marginal leakage in vitro that allows the determination of the penetration score [18][19][20][21]38,39] and the percentage of dye penetration length [40] as measures of clinical behaviour in vivo.…”

“…In in vitro studies evaluating microleakage as a measurement of marginal-sealing effectiveness, giomers have been investigated and compared to diacrylic resin composites, glass-ionomer cements (GICs), and their hybrids (resin-modified glass-ionomer cements (RMGICs), and compomers), ormocers and silorans [18][19][20].…”

“…Shathi et al [18] conducted in vivo combined with in vitro testing to compare the marginal microleakage of Admira/Admira Bond adhesive ormocer restorations with that of Beautifil/Beauti Bond adhesive giomer restorations in class I cavities. A higher degree of microleakage was detected in giomer than in ormocer restorations.…”

Nanohybrid and microfilled composite resin in Class II restoration of permanent molar teeth

“…6,7 After that, modified ceramic resin composites ormocer have been introduced which contain multifunctional methacrylate alkoxysilanes for the synthesis of inorganicorganic copolymer composite materials. 8,9,10 The nanohybrid resin composite ceram X (Dentsply-DeTrey, Germany) has been developed. In this system, the methacrylate modified silicon-dioxide-containing nanofiller (10 nm) is used as substitute for the microfiller and conventional resin matrix which is replaced by a matrix full of highly dispersed methacrylate modified polysiloxane particles.…”