Cargando…
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Polymerization shrinkage stress in composite restorations may lead to microleakage. Clinical methods such as using low-shrinkage composites have been suggested to overcome this problem; however, there are controversies about their efficiency in decreasing the microleakage....
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771054/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26966710 |
_version_ | 1782418360639684608 |
---|---|
author | Tavangar, Maryam Tayefeh Davalloo, Reza Darabi, Farideh Karambin, Mahsa Kazemi, Reza |
author_facet | Tavangar, Maryam Tayefeh Davalloo, Reza Darabi, Farideh Karambin, Mahsa Kazemi, Reza |
author_sort | Tavangar, Maryam |
collection | PubMed |
description | STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Polymerization shrinkage stress in composite restorations may lead to microleakage. Clinical methods such as using low-shrinkage composites have been suggested to overcome this problem; however, there are controversies about their efficiency in decreasing the microleakage. PURPOSE: This in vitro study was conducted to compare the microleakage of two low-shrinkage resin composites with a conventional one. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Fifty class V cavities of 2.5×3×2 mm (depth× length× width) were prepared in the buccal surfaces of intact bovine incisor teeth with the incisal margin on the enamel and gingival margin on the cementum. The teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups. In group 1, Clearfil APX (conventional) with SE Bond was used in 2 layers (Kuraray; Japan). In group 2, GC Kalore (low –shrinkage) with GC UniFil Bond was applied in one layer (GC Company). In group 3, the material of group 2 was applied in two layers. In group 4, FiltekP90 (low –shrinkage) with P90 System adhesive was applied in one layer (3M ESPE). In group 5, the materials of group 4 were applied in two layers. The samples were thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% fuchsin solution for 24h. The restorations were sectioned in buccolingual direction. Then they were evaluated for microleakage by using a stereomicroscope and scored as 0, 1, 2, and 3 and then Kruskal-Wallis test was used (p< 0.05). RESULTS: The groups were not significantly different regarding the microleakage in the coronal and cervical margins (p< 0.423 and p< 0.212, respectively); however, the Filtek P90 yielded the best results. In all groups, except group 5 (p= 0.018), the cervical margins had greater microleakage than the coronal margins. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that low-shrinkage resin composites may not reduce the marginal microleakage. The proper use of conventional resin composites may offer comparable clinical results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4771054 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Shiraz University of Medical Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47710542016-03-10 A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment Tavangar, Maryam Tayefeh Davalloo, Reza Darabi, Farideh Karambin, Mahsa Kazemi, Reza J Dent (Shiraz) Original Article STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Polymerization shrinkage stress in composite restorations may lead to microleakage. Clinical methods such as using low-shrinkage composites have been suggested to overcome this problem; however, there are controversies about their efficiency in decreasing the microleakage. PURPOSE: This in vitro study was conducted to compare the microleakage of two low-shrinkage resin composites with a conventional one. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Fifty class V cavities of 2.5×3×2 mm (depth× length× width) were prepared in the buccal surfaces of intact bovine incisor teeth with the incisal margin on the enamel and gingival margin on the cementum. The teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups. In group 1, Clearfil APX (conventional) with SE Bond was used in 2 layers (Kuraray; Japan). In group 2, GC Kalore (low –shrinkage) with GC UniFil Bond was applied in one layer (GC Company). In group 3, the material of group 2 was applied in two layers. In group 4, FiltekP90 (low –shrinkage) with P90 System adhesive was applied in one layer (3M ESPE). In group 5, the materials of group 4 were applied in two layers. The samples were thermocycled and immersed in 0.5% fuchsin solution for 24h. The restorations were sectioned in buccolingual direction. Then they were evaluated for microleakage by using a stereomicroscope and scored as 0, 1, 2, and 3 and then Kruskal-Wallis test was used (p< 0.05). RESULTS: The groups were not significantly different regarding the microleakage in the coronal and cervical margins (p< 0.423 and p< 0.212, respectively); however, the Filtek P90 yielded the best results. In all groups, except group 5 (p= 0.018), the cervical margins had greater microleakage than the coronal margins. CONCLUSION: The results suggested that low-shrinkage resin composites may not reduce the marginal microleakage. The proper use of conventional resin composites may offer comparable clinical results. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2016-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4771054/ /pubmed/26966710 Text en © 2016: Journal of dentistry (Shiraz) This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Tavangar, Maryam Tayefeh Davalloo, Reza Darabi, Farideh Karambin, Mahsa Kazemi, Reza A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment |
title |
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
|
title_full |
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
|
title_fullStr |
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
|
title_full_unstemmed |
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
|
title_short |
A Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Low-Shrinkage Composites with a Conventional Resin Composite: an In Vitro Assessment
|
title_sort | comparative evaluation of microleakage of two low-shrinkage composites with a conventional resin composite: an in vitro assessment |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4771054/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26966710 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tavangarmaryam acomparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT tayefehdavallooreza acomparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT darabifarideh acomparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT karambinmahsa acomparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT kazemireza acomparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT tavangarmaryam comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT tayefehdavallooreza comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT darabifarideh comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT karambinmahsa comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment AT kazemireza comparativeevaluationofmicroleakageoftwolowshrinkagecompositeswithaconventionalresincompositeaninvitroassessment |