Effect of two prophylaxis methods on marginal gap of Cl Vresin-modified glass-ionomer restorations

Kimyai, Soodabeh; Azar, Fatemeh Pournaghi; Daneshpooy, Mehdi; Kahnamoii, Mehdi Abed; Davoodi, Farnaz

doi:10.15171/joddd.2016.004

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This seepage can cause recurrent caries, pulpal injury, tooth discoloration, hypersensitivity of restored teeth, and accelerated deterioration of the restorative material. 11 To ensure the clinical relevance of marginal adaptation and microleakage, materials should be used that are appropriate to clinical dentistry. Therefore, this study compared three widely used GI-based materials, one of them recently released to dental market named bioactive ionic resin (ACTIVA), which are the best choices for restoring class V. 12 Every effort was made to standardize the methodology, and all steps were conducted by a single operator, and marginal adaptation was evaluated between different specimens using SEM.…”

Section: Gicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation and Microleakage of Three Glass Ionomer-Based Class V Restorations: In Vitro Study

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the marginal adaptation and microleakage of class V cavities restored with conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), and bioactive ionic resin (BIR) restorative materials after 6 months of water storage. Materials and Methods One hundred twenty standardized class V cavities (2 mm deep, 4 mm in width, and 3 mm in height) were prepared in sound extracted human molar teeth, where the coronal margins were in enamel while the cervical margins were in dentin. Three glass ionomer-based restorations were tested (n = 40): GIC (Equia Fil), RMGI (Fuji II LC), and BIR (ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative). Half of the teeth from each group (n = 20) were evaluated for their marginal adaptation with scanning electron microscopy and the other half submitted to dye penetration test to examine microleakage. Further division for each subgroup (n = 10) occurred to be tested immediately, while the remaining teeth were examined after keeping for 6 months and thermocycling. Statistical analysis The outcomes were analyzed by Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests. Results No statistically significant differences were observed among the three studied restorative materials. However, the differences were statistically significant in microleakage test between enamel and dentin and after water aging. Conclusion All tested restorative materials exhibited the same marginal adaptation and microleakage. Dentin substrate revealed greater microleakage than enamel, especially with BIR restorative material. Water aging had a negative effect on RMGI with respect to microleakage.

show abstract

Section: Gicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation and Microleakage of Three Glass Ionomer-Based Class V Restorations: In Vitro Study

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This system releases air jet, water and sodium bicarbonate particles that have the size by 250µm, and they may cause loss of resin surface smoothness, therefore they favor the staining and degradation of restorations 10,12 . On the other hand, studies have reported that the abrasiveness from air-polishing can be used as strategy to reduce dental and material surface staining 11,12 , due to the ability of SBAP to remove waste substances containing dyes from food, drinks and cigarette smoke 13,14 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of air-polishing on properties of nanocomposite submitted to coffee, red wine and cigarette smoke

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the surface roughness and the color stability of nanocomposite exposed to the sodium bicarbonate air-polishing (SBAP) followed by red wine, coffee and cigarette smoke exposure. Materials and Methods: 64 nanocomposite specimens were prepared and allocated in 8 groups: G1 (SBAP + distilled water), G2 (SBAP + coffee), G3 (SBAP + red wine), G4 (SBAP + cigarette smoke), G5 (distilled water), G6 (coffee), G7 (red wine) and G8 (cigarette smoke). The surface roughness was evaluated in three periods: before and after SBAP and after exposuring to agents tested. The color was evaluated according to CIEL*a*b* parameters using reflection spectrophotometer in two moments: initial and 30 days after the exposure to staining agents. Data were subjected to three-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey's test (5%). Results: The results showed a higher surface roughness of the nanocomposite submitted only to the SBAP and those exposed to the SBAP followed by exposure to the coffee or wine solution. The previous application of SBAP followed by cigarette smoke exposure did not increase the roughness of nanocomposite. The SBAP procedure just increased the staining for cigarette smoke group. Conclusion: The SBAP increases resin surface roughness, which worsens when there is exposure to coffee and red wine solution. In addition, SBAP may also provide increased staining of nanocomposites exposed to cigarette smoke.

show abstract

“…Gingival margin gaps were measured using a stereomicroscope (SMZ 1500; Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) at ×40 magnification. 24,29 A digital camera was used to photograph the selected areas with the use of a DS-L2 control unit (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) so that the gaps could be measured. 24,29 The gap widths were measured with the built-in software in µm by determining two points on each side of the gap (one on the restoration side and one on the root side) and measuring the distance between these two points.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The teeth were cleaned with a rubber cup and pumice and stored in 0.5% chloramine T trihydrate solution for one week and then stored in deionized water in a refrigerator at a temperature of 4ºC. 24 Twenty-four hours before the experimental procedures, the teeth were immersed in deionized water at a temperature of 23±2ºC. 24 To prepare the samples, standard Class V cavities (2 mm in depth, 2 mm in mesiodistal width and 3 mm in the occlusogingival width) were prepared on the buccal surfaces with butt joint margins; the occlusal and gingival margins of the cavities were both placed 1.5 mm occlusal to and gingival to the CEJ, respectively.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 24 Twenty-four hours before the experimental procedures, the teeth were immersed in deionized water at a temperature of 23±2ºC. 24 To prepare the samples, standard Class V cavities (2 mm in depth, 2 mm in mesiodistal width and 3 mm in the occlusogingival width) were prepared on the buccal surfaces with butt joint margins; the occlusal and gingival margins of the cavities were both placed 1.5 mm occlusal to and gingival to the CEJ, respectively. 25 The cavity preparation procedures were carried out with sharp diamond fissure instruments (Diatech Dental AG Heerbrugg, Switzerland) in a high-speed handpiece with air and water cooling.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of repeated preheating of dimethacrylate and silorane-based composite resins on marginal gap of class V restorations

P¹,

F²,

Navimipour³

et al. 2017

J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. One of the problems with composite resin restorations is gap formation at resin‒tooth interface. The present study evaluated the effect of preheating cycles of silorane- and dimethacrylate-based composite resins on gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V restorations.Methods. In this in vitro study, standard Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 48 bovine incisors. For restorative procedure, the samples were randomly divided into 2 groups based on the type of composite resin (group 1: di-methacrylate composite [Filtek Z250]; group 2: silorane composite [Filtek P90]) and each group was randomly divided into 2 subgroups based on the composite temperature (A: room temperature; B: after 40 preheating cycles up to 55°C). Marginal gaps were measured using a stereomicroscope at ×40 and analyzed with two-way ANOVA. Inter- and intra-group comparisons were analyzed with post-hoc Tukey tests. Significance level was defined at P < 0.05.Results. The maximum and minimum gaps were detected in groups 1-A and 2-B, respectively. The effects of composite resin type, preheating and interactive effect of these variables on gap formation were significant (P<0.001). Post-hoc Tukey tests showed greater gap in dimethacrylate compared to silorane composite resins (P< 0.001). In each group, gap values were greater in composite resins at room temperature compared to composite resins after 40 preheating cycles (P<0.001).Conclusion. Gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V cavities decreased due to preheating of both composite re-sins. Preheating of silorane-based composites can result in the best marginal adaptation.

show abstract

Effect of two prophylaxis methods on marginal gap of Cl Vresin-modified glass-ionomer restorations

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation and Microleakage of Three Glass Ionomer-Based Class V Restorations: In Vitro Study

Evaluation of Marginal Adaptation and Microleakage of Three Glass Ionomer-Based Class V Restorations: In Vitro Study

Effect of air-polishing on properties of nanocomposite submitted to coffee, red wine and cigarette smoke

The effect of repeated preheating of dimethacrylate and silorane-based composite resins on marginal gap of class V restorations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About