Cargando…
Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of traditional composite (Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond) and self-priming resin (Embrace Wetbond). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized Class V cavities partly in enamel and cementum were prepared in 20 extracted human premolars. Tee...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3410331/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22876008 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.97944 |
_version_ | 1782239720576647168 |
---|---|
author | Singla, Ruchi Bogra, Poonam Singal, Bhawana |
author_facet | Singla, Ruchi Bogra, Poonam Singal, Bhawana |
author_sort | Singla, Ruchi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of traditional composite (Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond) and self-priming resin (Embrace Wetbond). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized Class V cavities partly in enamel and cementum were prepared in 20 extracted human premolars. Teeth were divided into two groups. Group 1 was restored with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and Group 2 with Embrace Wetbond. The specimens were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 h and then subjected to 200 thermocycles at 5°C and 55°C with a 1 min dwell time. After thermocycling teeth were immersed in a 0.2% solution of methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned vertically approximately midway through the facial and lingual surfaces using a diamond saw blade. Microleakage was evaluated at enamel and cementum surfaces using 10 × stereomicroscope. The statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Wetbond showed less microleakage at occlusal and gingival margins as compared with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and the results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Class V cavities restored with Embrace Wetbond with fewer steps and fewer materials offers greater protection against microleakage at the tooth restorative interface. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3410331 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-34103312012-08-08 Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin Singla, Ruchi Bogra, Poonam Singal, Bhawana J Conserv Dent Original Article BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of traditional composite (Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond) and self-priming resin (Embrace Wetbond). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized Class V cavities partly in enamel and cementum were prepared in 20 extracted human premolars. Teeth were divided into two groups. Group 1 was restored with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and Group 2 with Embrace Wetbond. The specimens were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 h and then subjected to 200 thermocycles at 5°C and 55°C with a 1 min dwell time. After thermocycling teeth were immersed in a 0.2% solution of methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned vertically approximately midway through the facial and lingual surfaces using a diamond saw blade. Microleakage was evaluated at enamel and cementum surfaces using 10 × stereomicroscope. The statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Wetbond showed less microleakage at occlusal and gingival margins as compared with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and the results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Class V cavities restored with Embrace Wetbond with fewer steps and fewer materials offers greater protection against microleakage at the tooth restorative interface. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3410331/ /pubmed/22876008 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.97944 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Singla, Ruchi Bogra, Poonam Singal, Bhawana Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title | Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title_full | Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title_short | Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3410331/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22876008 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.97944 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT singlaruchi comparativeevaluationoftraditionalandselfpriminghydrophilicresin AT bograpoonam comparativeevaluationoftraditionalandselfpriminghydrophilicresin AT singalbhawana comparativeevaluationoftraditionalandselfpriminghydrophilicresin |