Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the microleakage of glass ionomers (conventional and resin modified) with that of recently introduced nanoionomers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized class I and class V cavities were prepared on 120 young permanent teeth. Samples were equally divided...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Diwanji, Amish, Dhar, Vineet, Arora, Ruchi, Madhusudan, A., Rathore, Ambika Singh
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/PMC4121918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25097418
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.136193
_version_ 1782329278060298240
author Diwanji, Amish
Dhar, Vineet
Arora, Ruchi
Madhusudan, A.
Rathore, Ambika Singh
author_facet Diwanji, Amish
Dhar, Vineet
Arora, Ruchi
Madhusudan, A.
Rathore, Ambika Singh
author_sort Diwanji, Amish
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the microleakage of glass ionomers (conventional and resin modified) with that of recently introduced nanoionomers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized class I and class V cavities were prepared on 120 young permanent teeth. Samples were equally divided into group I (class I restorations) and group II (class V restorations), and further divided into subgroups. The subgroups were restored with Fuji IX, Fuji II LC, and newly introduced Ketac(™) N 100 (KN 100). Samples were thermocycled and submerged in Acridine dye for 24 h. Samples were sectioned to view under fluorescent microscope and marginal leakage was evaluated by Chi-square and Kruskal — Wallis test. RESULTS: Fuji IX showed the maximum leakage, followed by LC II and the least was observed in KN 100. In class I restorations, there was significant difference while comparing Fuji IX with Fuji LC II and KN 100 and nonsignificant difference between LC II and KN100. In class V restorations, Fuji IX and KN100, KN 100 and LC II showed significant difference. Fuji IX and LC II showed nonsignificant difference. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, Fuji IX showed the maximum microleakage. KN 100 showed minimum leakage, better sealing ability, and was more consistent.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4121918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41219182014-08-05 Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study Diwanji, Amish Dhar, Vineet Arora, Ruchi Madhusudan, A. Rathore, Ambika Singh J Nat Sci Biol Med Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the microleakage of glass ionomers (conventional and resin modified) with that of recently introduced nanoionomers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Standardized class I and class V cavities were prepared on 120 young permanent teeth. Samples were equally divided into group I (class I restorations) and group II (class V restorations), and further divided into subgroups. The subgroups were restored with Fuji IX, Fuji II LC, and newly introduced Ketac(™) N 100 (KN 100). Samples were thermocycled and submerged in Acridine dye for 24 h. Samples were sectioned to view under fluorescent microscope and marginal leakage was evaluated by Chi-square and Kruskal — Wallis test. RESULTS: Fuji IX showed the maximum leakage, followed by LC II and the least was observed in KN 100. In class I restorations, there was significant difference while comparing Fuji IX with Fuji LC II and KN 100 and nonsignificant difference between LC II and KN100. In class V restorations, Fuji IX and KN100, KN 100 and LC II showed significant difference. Fuji IX and LC II showed nonsignificant difference. CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, Fuji IX showed the maximum microleakage. KN 100 showed minimum leakage, better sealing ability, and was more consistent. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4121918/ /pubmed/25097418 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.136193 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine 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
Diwanji, Amish
Dhar, Vineet
Arora, Ruchi
Madhusudan, A.
Rathore, Ambika Singh
Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title_full Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title_short Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study
title_sort comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: an in vitro study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4121918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25097418
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.136193
work_keys_str_mv AT diwanjiamish comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageofthreerestorativeglassionomercementsaninvitrostudy
AT dharvineet comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageofthreerestorativeglassionomercementsaninvitrostudy
AT aroraruchi comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageofthreerestorativeglassionomercementsaninvitrostudy
AT madhusudana comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageofthreerestorativeglassionomercementsaninvitrostudy
AT rathoreambikasingh comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageofthreerestorativeglassionomercementsaninvitrostudy