Literature DB >> 12537342

Microleakage and damage to adjacent teeth when finishing Class II adhesive preparations using either a sonic device or bur.

Niek J M Opdam1, Joost J M Roeters, Edwin van Berghem, Edwin Eijsvogels, Ewald Bronkhorst.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To detetmine the damage to adjacent tooth surfaces and the quality of the marginal seal of a resin-based composite restoration when a sonic preparation device (Sonicsys) was used to finish the preparation outline.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three general practitioners prepared 60 Class II box-type cavities in extracted teeth placed in an artificial jaw in a phantom-head. In 30 preparations a bevel was made with a bur, in the other 30 restorations the margins were finished using the sonic preparation device. All preparations were restored with a total-etch technique and a posterior composite (SA primer-Photo Bond-Clearfil PhotoPosterior). Microleakage was tested and the adjacent teeth were inspected for iatrogenic damage.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in microleakage were observed between the experimental and control groups. In the control group, 80% of the approximal surfaces of adjacent teeth were damaged while only 30% of the adjacent surfaces were damaged in the experimental group (P < 0.05, Chi-square test).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12537342

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Dent        ISSN: 0894-8275            Impact factor:   1.522


  5 in total

1.  Proximal direct composite restorations and chairside CAD/CAM inlays: marginal adaptation of a two-step self-etch adhesive with and without selective enamel conditioning.

Authors:  T Bortolotto; I Onisor; I Krejci
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Prophylometric and SEM analyses of four different finishing methods.

Authors:  G Chiodera; F Cerutti; A Cerutti; A Putignano; F Mangani
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2013-03-19

Review 3.  Minimal intervention dentistry II: part 4. Minimal intervention techniques of preparation and adhesive restorations. The contribution of the sono-abrasive techniques.

Authors:  F Decup; J-J Lasfargues
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.626

Review 4.  Evidence provided for the use of oscillating instruments in restorative dentistry: A systematic review.

Authors:  Panagiotis Ntovas; Spyridon Doukoudakis; John Tzoutzas; Panagiotis Lagouvardos
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

5.  Marginal quality of ceramic inlays after three different instrumental cavity preparation methods of the proximal boxes.

Authors:  Ella A Naumova; Fabian Schiml; Wolfgang H Arnold; Andree Piwowarczyk
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.573

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.