Cargando…
A comparative evaluation of micro shear bond strength and microleakage between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement and residual dentin following excavation of carious dentin using Carie CareTM and conventional caries removal in primary teeth: an in vitro study
Background: The bond between the dentin and restorative material contributes to the success of the restoration. Structural changes associated with prepared dentin may influence the bonding of restorative materials. The present study evaluates the bond between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000 Research Limited
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10206442/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37234338 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.131919.1 |
Sumario: | Background: The bond between the dentin and restorative material contributes to the success of the restoration. Structural changes associated with prepared dentin may influence the bonding of restorative materials. The present study evaluates the bond between the resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and residual dentin following excavation of carious dentin using Carie Care (TM) and conventional caries removal in primary teeth. Methods: 52 primary teeth with dentinal caries were randomly grouped into group I, where caries removal was done using the conventional method, and group II which used Carie Care (TM). All the teeth were restored using RMGIC. Micro shear bond strength between the residual dentin and the cement was tested using universal testing machine and the dye penetration method was used for microleakage testing. Independent t-test was performed for intergroup comparison. Pearson chi-square test was carried out to evaluate the microleakage patterns in the enamel and dentin. Results: The mean micro-shear bond strength of group I was 6.03±1.6 and that of group II was 8.54±2.92; this difference was statistically significant with a p-value of 0.012. Microleakage was higher in the test group (1.38±0.51) than the control group (0.77±0.6) and was significant with a p -value of .036. Conclusions: Papain-based chemomechanical agent Carie Care (TM) can be used as an alternative method to conventional caries removal. However, further studies need to explore methods to improve the marginal sealing capacity of RMGIC to the residual dentin after chemomechanical caries removal. |
---|