Cargando…

Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to make a comparison between microleakage of conventionally restored class V cavities using bur and acid etchant and, the ones prepared and conditioned by Er:YAG laser. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 recently extracted intact caries and filling free human permanent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Arami, Sakineh, Shahabi, Sima, Tabatabaie, Masomeh, Chiniforush, Nasim, Morshedi, Ehsan, Torabi, Sara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4056390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24944442
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.131778
_version_ 1782320825463996416
author Arami, Sakineh
Shahabi, Sima
Tabatabaie, Masomeh
Chiniforush, Nasim
Morshedi, Ehsan
Torabi, Sara
author_facet Arami, Sakineh
Shahabi, Sima
Tabatabaie, Masomeh
Chiniforush, Nasim
Morshedi, Ehsan
Torabi, Sara
author_sort Arami, Sakineh
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to make a comparison between microleakage of conventionally restored class V cavities using bur and acid etchant and, the ones prepared and conditioned by Er:YAG laser. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 recently extracted intact caries and filling free human permanent molars were used for this study. Then, Cold cure acrylic resin was used to seal the apices. The samples were randomly assigned to 5 groups of six each. Class V cavities were prepared one on buccal and one on lingual surface of each sample. Group 1: cavity preparation by diamond bur and turbine + acid etch, Group 2: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser + acid etch, Group 3: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser + Laser etching, Group 4: cavity preparation by diamond bur and turbine + laser etching, Group 5: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser with no conditioning procedure. The cavities restored with restorative composite resin. Samples were then immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. The data were then analyzed using Wilcoxon signed ranks test and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests. RESULTS: The Kruskal Wallis test showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) between enamel and cementum margin microleakage, while the higher microleakage was related to the cementum margin of restorations. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in evaluating microleakeage degree of cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser and diamond bur.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4056390
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40563902014-06-18 Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur Arami, Sakineh Shahabi, Sima Tabatabaie, Masomeh Chiniforush, Nasim Morshedi, Ehsan Torabi, Sara J Conserv Dent Original Article INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to make a comparison between microleakage of conventionally restored class V cavities using bur and acid etchant and, the ones prepared and conditioned by Er:YAG laser. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 30 recently extracted intact caries and filling free human permanent molars were used for this study. Then, Cold cure acrylic resin was used to seal the apices. The samples were randomly assigned to 5 groups of six each. Class V cavities were prepared one on buccal and one on lingual surface of each sample. Group 1: cavity preparation by diamond bur and turbine + acid etch, Group 2: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser + acid etch, Group 3: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser + Laser etching, Group 4: cavity preparation by diamond bur and turbine + laser etching, Group 5: cavity preparation by Er:YAG laser with no conditioning procedure. The cavities restored with restorative composite resin. Samples were then immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. The data were then analyzed using Wilcoxon signed ranks test and Kruskal-Wallis statistical tests. RESULTS: The Kruskal Wallis test showed a significant difference (P < 0.05) between enamel and cementum margin microleakage, while the higher microleakage was related to the cementum margin of restorations. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in evaluating microleakeage degree of cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser and diamond bur. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4056390/ /pubmed/24944442 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.131778 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
Arami, Sakineh
Shahabi, Sima
Tabatabaie, Masomeh
Chiniforush, Nasim
Morshedi, Ehsan
Torabi, Sara
Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title_full Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title_fullStr Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title_full_unstemmed Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title_short Assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation or diamond bur
title_sort assessing microleakage of composite restorations in class v cavities prepared by er:yag laser irradiation or diamond bur
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4056390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24944442
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.131778
work_keys_str_mv AT aramisakineh assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur
AT shahabisima assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur
AT tabatabaiemasomeh assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur
AT chiniforushnasim assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur
AT morshediehsan assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur
AT torabisara assessingmicroleakageofcompositerestorationsinclassvcavitiespreparedbyeryaglaserirradiationordiamondbur