Cargando…

Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin

BACKGROUND: An occurrence of secondary caries around the indirect restoration margin is reported to remain a leading cause of failures. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the interfacial microleakage of conventional glass-ionomer (CGI), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and Nano-hybrid composite...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Haralur, Satheesh B., AL Ghaseb, Ghaseb Ahmed, Alqahtani, Norah Ali, Alqahtani, Bader
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7916530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33665019
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10823
_version_ 1783657498123698176
author Haralur, Satheesh B.
AL Ghaseb, Ghaseb Ahmed
Alqahtani, Norah Ali
Alqahtani, Bader
author_facet Haralur, Satheesh B.
AL Ghaseb, Ghaseb Ahmed
Alqahtani, Norah Ali
Alqahtani, Bader
author_sort Haralur, Satheesh B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: An occurrence of secondary caries around the indirect restoration margin is reported to remain a leading cause of failures. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the interfacial microleakage of conventional glass-ionomer (CGI), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and Nano-hybrid composite (CR) restorations at a full veneer margin crown. METHODS: Ninety human extracted molar teeth were divided into three groups (n = 30). Each group was subdivided into three subgroups (n = 10) according to the extent of the structural defects; The structural defect in G1 had a depth of 1.5 mm, width and length at 2 mm and 1 mm intrusion within the crown cervical margin. The corresponding structural defect dimension values for G2 were 2, 5, 4 and 2 mm with defects extending onto the root structure. Meanwhile, G3: structural deficiency of 2 mm depth, 3 mm width and 3 mm length and with 1.5 mm extension into the prepared teeth. These structural defects in each subgroup were restored with CGI, RMGI and CR. Artificial carious lesion formation was induced at the cervical finish line with a demineralizing solution. The artificial carious lesions were restored as per the group distribution. Subsequently, teeth samples were prepared and cemented with Nickel-chromium full coverage restorations utilizing glass-ionomer luting cement. Teeth samples were thermocycled, isolated with nail varnish, and immersed in 0.1% methylene blue for 24 h. The teeth samples were sectioned longitudinally, dye penetration was evaluated with a stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed with Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests. RESULTS: CGI-G1 recorded the highest micro-leakage score at 1.450; while CR-G3 recorded the least score (0.350). At a cementum-restoration interface, CR-G1 (0.850) documented the lowest micro-leakage; RMGI-G3 had a greater value at 1.700. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid CR could be effectively used to restore the restoration of a marginal gap around crown margins.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7916530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79165302021-03-03 Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin Haralur, Satheesh B. AL Ghaseb, Ghaseb Ahmed Alqahtani, Norah Ali Alqahtani, Bader PeerJ Dentistry BACKGROUND: An occurrence of secondary caries around the indirect restoration margin is reported to remain a leading cause of failures. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the interfacial microleakage of conventional glass-ionomer (CGI), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) and Nano-hybrid composite (CR) restorations at a full veneer margin crown. METHODS: Ninety human extracted molar teeth were divided into three groups (n = 30). Each group was subdivided into three subgroups (n = 10) according to the extent of the structural defects; The structural defect in G1 had a depth of 1.5 mm, width and length at 2 mm and 1 mm intrusion within the crown cervical margin. The corresponding structural defect dimension values for G2 were 2, 5, 4 and 2 mm with defects extending onto the root structure. Meanwhile, G3: structural deficiency of 2 mm depth, 3 mm width and 3 mm length and with 1.5 mm extension into the prepared teeth. These structural defects in each subgroup were restored with CGI, RMGI and CR. Artificial carious lesion formation was induced at the cervical finish line with a demineralizing solution. The artificial carious lesions were restored as per the group distribution. Subsequently, teeth samples were prepared and cemented with Nickel-chromium full coverage restorations utilizing glass-ionomer luting cement. Teeth samples were thermocycled, isolated with nail varnish, and immersed in 0.1% methylene blue for 24 h. The teeth samples were sectioned longitudinally, dye penetration was evaluated with a stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed with Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney U tests. RESULTS: CGI-G1 recorded the highest micro-leakage score at 1.450; while CR-G3 recorded the least score (0.350). At a cementum-restoration interface, CR-G1 (0.850) documented the lowest micro-leakage; RMGI-G3 had a greater value at 1.700. CONCLUSIONS: The hybrid CR could be effectively used to restore the restoration of a marginal gap around crown margins. PeerJ Inc. 2021-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7916530/ /pubmed/33665019 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10823 Text en © 2021 Haralur et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Dentistry
Haralur, Satheesh B.
AL Ghaseb, Ghaseb Ahmed
Alqahtani, Norah Ali
Alqahtani, Bader
Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title_full Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title_fullStr Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title_short Comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
title_sort comparison of microleakage between different restorative materials to restore marginal gap at crown margin
topic Dentistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7916530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33665019
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10823
work_keys_str_mv AT haralursatheeshb comparisonofmicroleakagebetweendifferentrestorativematerialstorestoremarginalgapatcrownmargin
AT alghasebghasebahmed comparisonofmicroleakagebetweendifferentrestorativematerialstorestoremarginalgapatcrownmargin
AT alqahtaninorahali comparisonofmicroleakagebetweendifferentrestorativematerialstorestoremarginalgapatcrownmargin
AT alqahtanibader comparisonofmicroleakagebetweendifferentrestorativematerialstorestoremarginalgapatcrownmargin