[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit ::
:: Volume 30, Issue 3 (7-2018) ::
J Islam Dent Assoc Iran 2018, 30(3): 119-125 Back to browse issues page
Microleakage Evaluation of Class II Composite Resin Restorations with Different Thicknesses of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer
Horieh Moosavi1, Hamideh Sadat Mohammadipour 2, Mohaddeceh Karamimoghaddam3
1- Associate Professor, Dental Materials Research Center, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Dental Materials Research Center, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran , Mohammadi-pourh@mums.ac.ir
3- Dentist, Private Practice, Mashhad, Iran
Abstract:   (488 Views)
Background and Aim: One of the weaknesses of Class II composite resin restorations is gingival microleakage which contributes to postoperative sensitivity and secondary caries. The aim was to evaluate the microleakage in Class II composite resin restorations with different thicknesses of resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI).
Materials and Methods: In this in-vitro study, standardized Class II slot cavities were prepared on the proximal surfaces of 90 molars. In group 1, total-etch adhesive and composite resin were applied using the incremental technique. In group 2, total-etch adhesive and composite were applied using the bulk technique. In group 3, 1 mm of RMGI was applied over the gingival floor, which was covered with increments of composite. In group 4, 1 mm of RMGI was placed on the gingival floor and covered with composite using the bulk technique. In group 5, 2 mm of RMGI was applied over the gingival floor, followed by an incremental composite placement. In group 6, 2 mm of RMGI was placed on the gingival floor, and the cavity was filled using the bulk technique. After thermocycling and staining with methylene blue, the samples were sectioned, and the extent of dye penetration was examined under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test and logistic regression (α=0.05).
Results: The lowest and highest dye penetrations were observed in the first, second, and fifth groups, respectively. The RMGI thickness did not influence the microleakage scores significantly in either composite placement techniques (P=0.828).
Conclusion: None of the restorative techniques completely eliminated microleakage of Class II composite resin restorations.
Keywords: Dental Leakage, Composite Resins, Glass Ionomer, Open Sandwich
Full-Text [PDF 433 kb]   (210 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Orginal | Subject: Restorative Dentistry
References
1. Kuper NK, Opdam NJ, Ruben JL, de Soet JJ, Cenci MS, Bronkhorst EM, et al. Gap size and wall lesion development next to composite. J Dent Res. 2014 Jul;93(7 Suppl):108S-113S.
2. Hofmann N, Markert T, Hugo B, Klaiber B. Effect of high intensity vs. soft-start halogen irradiation on light-cured resin-based compo-sites. Part I. Temperature rise and polymeriza-tion shrinkage. Am J Dent. 2003 Dec;16(6):421-30.
3. Lutz F, Krejci I, Luescher B, Oldenburg TR. Improved proximal margin adaptation of Class II composite resin restorations by use of light-reflecting wedges. Quintessence Int. 1986 Oct;17(10):659-64.
4. Worm DA Jr, Meiers JC. Effect of various types of contamination on microleakage between beta-quartz inserts and resin composite. Quintessence Int. 1996 Apr;27(4):271-7.
5. Demarco FF, Ramos OL, Mota CS, Formolo E, Justino LM. Influence of different restorative techniques on microleakage in Class II cavities with gingival wall in cementum. Oper Dent. 2001 May-Jun;26(3):253-9.
6. Sousa-Lima RX, Silva L, Chaves L, Geraldeli S, Alonso R, Borges B. Extensive Assessment of the Physical, Mechanical, and Adhesion Behavior of a Low-viscosity Bulk Fill Composite and a Traditional Resin Composite in Tooth Cavities. Oper Dent. 2017 Sep/Oct;42(5):E159-E166.
7. Jackson RD. Class II composite resin restora-tions: faster, easier, predictable. Br Dent J. 2016 Nov 18;221(10):623-631.
8. Hofmann N, Hunecke A. Influence of curing methods and matrix type on the marginal seal of class II resin-based composite restorations in vitro. Oper Dent. 2006 Jan-Feb;31(1):97-105.
9. Chuang SF, Jin YT, Liu JK, Chang CH, Shieh DB. Influence of flowable composite lining thickness on Class II composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2004 May-Jun;29(3):301-8.
10. Jawaed NU, Abidi SY, Qazi FU, Ahmed S. An In-Vitro Evaluation of Microleakage at the Cervical Margin Between Two Different Class II Restorative Techniques Using Dye Penetra-tion Method. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2016 Sep; 26 (9):748-52.
11. Kasraei S, Azarsina M, Majidi S. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-and-rinse and self-etch dentin adhe-sive systems. Oper Dent. 2011 Mar-Apr;36(2):213-21.
12. Neme AM, Maxson BB, Pink FE, Aksu MN. Microleakage of Class II packable resin composites lined with flowables: an in vitro study. Oper Dent. 2002 Nov-Dec;27(6):600-5.
13. Xie H, Zhang F, Wu Y, Chen C, Liu W. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ion-omer cement. Aust Dent J. 2008 Dec;53(4):325-31.
14. Mount GJ. Buonocore Memorial Lecture. Glass-ionomer cements: past, present and future. Oper Dent. 1994 May-Jun;19(3):82-90.
15. Van Dijken JW, Kieri C, Carlen M. Longevity of extensive class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement. J Dent Res. 1999 Jul;78(7):1319-25.
16. Wibowo G, Stockton L. Microleakage of Class II composite restorations. Am J Dent. 2001 Jun; 14 (3):177-85.
17. Majety KK, Pujar M. In vitro evaluation of mi-croleakage of class II packable composite resin restorations using flowable composite and resin-modified glass ionomers as intermediate layers. J Conserv Dent. 2011 Oct;14(4):414-7.
18. Besnault C, Attal JP. Simulated oral environment and microleakage of Class II resin-based composite and sandwich restorations. Am J Dent.2003 Jun;16(3):186-90.
19. Dietrich T, Kraemer M, Losche GM, Wernecke KD, Roulet JF. Influence of dentin conditioning and contamination on the marginal integrity of sandwich Class II restorations. Oper Dent. 2000 Sep-Oct;25(5):401-10.
20. Friedl KH, Schmalz G, Hiller KA, Mortazavi F. Marginal adaptation of composite restorations versus hybrid ionomer/composite sandwich restorations. Oper Dent. 1997 Jan-Feb;22(1):21-9.
21. Cheong Ian AT, Abdul Muttlib NA, Wan Bakar WZ, Khursheed Alam M. Comparison between microleakage of composite and porce-lain in class V restoration: an in vitro study. Int Med J. 2013 Jun;20(3):359-62.
22. Hilton TJ. Can modern restorative procedures and materials reliably seal cavities? In vitro investigations. Part 2. Am J Dent. 2002 Aug;15 (4):279-89.
23. Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of microleakage around dental restorations: a review. Oper Dent. 1997 Jul-Aug;22(4):173-85.
24. Shafiei F, Akbarian S. Microleakage of nanofilled resin-modified glass-ionomer/silorane- or methacrylate-based com-posite sandwich Class II restoration: effect of simultaneous bonding. Oper Dent. 2014 Jan-Feb;39(1):E22-30.
25. Loguercio AD, de Oliveira Bauer JR, Reis A, Grande RH. In vitro microleakage of packable composites in Class II restorations. Quintes-sence Int. 2004 Jan;35(1):29-34.
26. Karaman E, Ozgunaltay G. Polymerization shrinkage of different types of composite resins and microleakage with and without liner in class II cavities. Oper Dent. 2014 May-Jun;39(3):325-31.
27. Chuang SF, Jin YT, Lin TS, Chang CH, García-Godoy F. Effects of lining materials on microleakage and internal voids of Class II resin-based composite restorations. Am J Dent. 2003 Apr;16(2):84-90.
28. Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E. Class II com-posite resin restorations using glass-ionomer liners: microleakage studies. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1996 Fall;21(1):67-70.
29. Beznos C. Microleakage at the cervical margin of composite Class II cavities with different restorative techniques. Oper Dent. 2001 Jan-Feb; 26(1):60-9.
30. Crim GA, Chapman KW. Reducing microleakage in Class II restorations: an in vitro study. Quintessence Int. 1994 Nov;25(11):781-5.
31. Andersson-Wenckert IE, van Dijken JW, Kieri C. Durability of extensive Class II open-sandwich restorations with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement after 6 years. Am J Dent. 2004 Feb; 17(1): 43-50.
32. Bagis YH, Baltacioglu IH, Kahyaogullari S. Comparing microleakage and the layering methods of silorane-based resin composite in wide Class II MOD cavities. Oper Dent. 2009 Sep-Oct; 34(5): 578-85.
33. Kim YG, Hirano S. Setting shrinkage and hygroscopic expansion of resin-modified glass-ionomer in experimental cylindrical cavi-ties. Dent Mater J. 1999 Mar;18(1):63-75.
34. Alonso RC, Cunha LG, Correr GM, De Goes MF, Correr-Sobrinho L, Puppin-Rontani RM, et al. Association of photoactivation methods and low modulus liners on marginal adaptation of composite restorations. Acta Odontol Scand. 2004 Dec; 62(6):298-304.
35. Payne JH 4th. The marginal seal of Class II res-torations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1999 Winter;23(2):123-30.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Moosavi H, Mohammadipour H S, Karamimoghaddam M. Microleakage Evaluation of Class II Composite Resin Restorations with Different Thicknesses of Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer . J Islam Dent Assoc Iran. 2018; 30 (3) :119-125
URL: http://jidai.ir/article-1-1978-en.html


Volume 30, Issue 3 (7-2018) Back to browse issues page
Journal of Islamic Dental Association of Iran

AWT IMAGE

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.06 seconds with 32 queries by YEKTAWEB 3925