Cargando…

In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins

BACKGROUND: There is still debate about the most appropriate restorative material category to relocate the proximal deep cervical margins, thus, this study aimed to compare the marginal and internal adaptation of four base materials used for deep margin elevation, and to evaluate each base material/...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ismail, Hoda S., Ali, Ashraf I., Mehesen, Rabab El., Garcia-Godoy, Franklin, Mahmoud, Salah H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medicina Oral S.L. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9328484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35912027
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.59652
_version_ 1784757730121089024
author Ismail, Hoda S.
Ali, Ashraf I.
Mehesen, Rabab El.
Garcia-Godoy, Franklin
Mahmoud, Salah H.
author_facet Ismail, Hoda S.
Ali, Ashraf I.
Mehesen, Rabab El.
Garcia-Godoy, Franklin
Mahmoud, Salah H.
author_sort Ismail, Hoda S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is still debate about the most appropriate restorative material category to relocate the proximal deep cervical margins, thus, this study aimed to compare the marginal and internal adaptation of four base materials used for deep margin elevation, and to evaluate each base material/overlying composite interface. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty six molars received class II cavities with dentin/cementum gingival margins. They were divided into four groups and their gingival margins were elevated using either; resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI), highly viscous conventional glass ionomer (HV-GIC), flowable bulk fill resin composite (Bulk Flow) and bioactive ionic resin (Activa). The rest of the cavities were completed with the same overlying composite. Half of each group was either; kept in sterile water for 1 week, or subjected to 18 months water storage and 15,000 thermal cycles. Base materials/gingival dentin interfaces were examined under a scanning electron microscope at different magnifications, and percentage of continuous margin (% CM) and maximum gap width (MGW) were analyzed, in addition to base materials/overlying composite interfaces evaluations. % CM values were statistically analyzed using Two-way analysis of variance, Tukey post hoc tests (at p<0.05) and Pearson’s correlation while MGW values were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis, Mann–Whitney U tests and Spearmen correlation RESULTS: Both Bulk Flow and Activa had better marginal integrity than RMGI and HV-GIC. All base materials were adversely affected by aging. All base materials/overlying composite interfaces were continuous and age defying. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of marginal integrity, Bulk Flow and Activa might be preferable for proximal dentin margin elevation under direct restoration compared to the other tested base materials. Key words:Deep proximal margin, interface analysis, marginal quality, open sandwich technique.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9328484
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Medicina Oral S.L.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93284842022-07-29 In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins Ismail, Hoda S. Ali, Ashraf I. Mehesen, Rabab El. Garcia-Godoy, Franklin Mahmoud, Salah H. J Clin Exp Dent Research BACKGROUND: There is still debate about the most appropriate restorative material category to relocate the proximal deep cervical margins, thus, this study aimed to compare the marginal and internal adaptation of four base materials used for deep margin elevation, and to evaluate each base material/overlying composite interface. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty six molars received class II cavities with dentin/cementum gingival margins. They were divided into four groups and their gingival margins were elevated using either; resin modified glass ionomer (RMGI), highly viscous conventional glass ionomer (HV-GIC), flowable bulk fill resin composite (Bulk Flow) and bioactive ionic resin (Activa). The rest of the cavities were completed with the same overlying composite. Half of each group was either; kept in sterile water for 1 week, or subjected to 18 months water storage and 15,000 thermal cycles. Base materials/gingival dentin interfaces were examined under a scanning electron microscope at different magnifications, and percentage of continuous margin (% CM) and maximum gap width (MGW) were analyzed, in addition to base materials/overlying composite interfaces evaluations. % CM values were statistically analyzed using Two-way analysis of variance, Tukey post hoc tests (at p<0.05) and Pearson’s correlation while MGW values were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis, Mann–Whitney U tests and Spearmen correlation RESULTS: Both Bulk Flow and Activa had better marginal integrity than RMGI and HV-GIC. All base materials were adversely affected by aging. All base materials/overlying composite interfaces were continuous and age defying. CONCLUSIONS: In terms of marginal integrity, Bulk Flow and Activa might be preferable for proximal dentin margin elevation under direct restoration compared to the other tested base materials. Key words:Deep proximal margin, interface analysis, marginal quality, open sandwich technique. Medicina Oral S.L. 2022-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9328484/ /pubmed/35912027 http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.59652 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Medicina Oral S.L. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Ismail, Hoda S.
Ali, Ashraf I.
Mehesen, Rabab El.
Garcia-Godoy, Franklin
Mahmoud, Salah H.
In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title_full In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title_fullStr In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title_full_unstemmed In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title_short In vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
title_sort in vitro marginal and internal adaptation of four different base materials used to elevate proximal dentin gingival margins
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9328484/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35912027
http://dx.doi.org/10.4317/jced.59652
work_keys_str_mv AT ismailhodas invitromarginalandinternaladaptationoffourdifferentbasematerialsusedtoelevateproximaldentingingivalmargins
AT aliashrafi invitromarginalandinternaladaptationoffourdifferentbasematerialsusedtoelevateproximaldentingingivalmargins
AT mehesenrababel invitromarginalandinternaladaptationoffourdifferentbasematerialsusedtoelevateproximaldentingingivalmargins
AT garciagodoyfranklin invitromarginalandinternaladaptationoffourdifferentbasematerialsusedtoelevateproximaldentingingivalmargins
AT mahmoudsalahh invitromarginalandinternaladaptationoffourdifferentbasematerialsusedtoelevateproximaldentingingivalmargins