Literature DB >> 23135785

Microleakage of Er:YAG laser and dental bur prepared cavities in primary teeth restored with different adhesive restorative materials.

Ali Baghalian1, Yahya B Nakhjavani, Tabassom Hooshmand, Pouria Motahhary, Hoda Bahramian.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser irradiation and conventional dental bur cavity preparation on in vitro microleakage of class V cavities restored with different adhesive restorative materials and two types of self-etching adhesives in primary teeth. Standard class V cavities were prepared on 80 extracted primary, and the teeth were randomly divided into eight subgroups prepared either by dental bur or Er:YAG laser irradiation and then restored with self-cured glass ionomer (GI), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), resin composite and Clearfil SE Bond (two-step self-etching adhesive), and resin composite and Clearfil S3 Bond (one-step self-etching adhesive). Restorations were finished and stored in distilled water at 37 °C for 24 h and then subjected to thermocycling. All the teeth were sealed with nail varnish, placed in a silver nitrate solution, and then vertically cut in a buccolingually direction. Subsequently, the specimens were evaluated for gingival and occlusal microleakage using a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Mann-Whitney test. Wilcoxon test was used for comparing occlusal microleakage with gingival microleakage at p < 0.05. A higher degree of occlusal and gingival microleakage values for the teeth restored with GI or RMGI was obtained by both preparation methods compared with that of resin composites and the two self-etching primers. Er:YAG laser irradiation resulted in a significantly higher degree of microleakage only at the gingival margins for teeth restored with GI or RMGI, or composite and Clearfil S3 Bond compared with the bur preparation. The Er:YAG laser-prepared teeth restored with composite and Clearfil SE Bond demonstrated a better marginal seal on occlusal and gingival margins compared with that of bur-prepared cavities. The degree of microleakage in class V cavities was affected by the type of adhesive restorative materials, type of self-etching adhesive, cavity margin location, and tooth preparation method either by Er:YAG laser or dental bur.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23135785     DOI: 10.1007/s10103-012-1222-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lasers Med Sci        ISSN: 0268-8921            Impact factor:   3.161


  45 in total

1.  Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges.

Authors:  Bart Van Meerbeek; Jan De Munck; Yasuhiro Yoshida; Satoshi Inoue; Marcos Vargas; Padmini Vijay; Kirsten Van Landuyt; Paul Lambrechts; Guido Vanherle
Journal:  Oper Dent       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.440

Review 2.  The use of lasers in dentistry: principles of operation and clinical applications.

Authors:  Adam Stabholz; Rephael Zeltser; Mordechai Sela; Benjamin Peretz; Joshua Moshonov; Daniel Ziskind; Ayala Stabholz
Journal:  Compend Contin Educ Dent       Date:  2003-12

3.  The interfacial region of the tooth/glass ionomer restoration: a confocal optical microscope study.

Authors:  T F Watson; R W Billington; J A Williams
Journal:  Am J Dent       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 1.522

4.  Microleakage of class V cavities with different adhesive systems prepared by a diamond instrument and different parameters of Er:YAG laser irradiation.

Authors:  Nuray Attar; Yonca Korkmaz; Emre Ozel; Ceren Ozge Bicer; Erhan Firatli
Journal:  Photomed Laser Surg       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.796

5.  Enamel and dentine of deciduous teeth Er:YAG laser prepared. A SEM study.

Authors:  R Kornblit; M Bossù; D Mari; J P Rocca; A Polimeni
Journal:  Eur J Paediatr Dent       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.231

6.  Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion.

Authors:  D H Pashley; R M Carvalho
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Microleakage of Class V composite restorations prepared conventionally with those prepared with an Er:YAG laser: a pilot study.

Authors:  G Z Wright; R J McConnell; U Keller
Journal:  Pediatr Dent       Date:  1993 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.874

8.  Clinical evaluation of chemomechanical and mechanical caries removal: status of the restorations at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.

Authors:  Zuhal Kirzioglu; Taskin Gurbuz; Yucel Yilmaz
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2006-09-13       Impact factor: 3.573

9.  Effect of surface treatments on the bond strength of glass ionomers to enamel.

Authors:  Eileen A Glasspoole; Robert L Erickson; Carel L Davidson
Journal:  Dent Mater       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.304

10.  The use of Erbium:YAG laser for caries removal in paediatric patients following Minimally Invasive Dentistry concepts.

Authors:  R Kornblit; D Trapani; M Bossù; M Muller-Bolla; J P Rocca; A Polimeni
Journal:  Eur J Paediatr Dent       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.231

View more
  8 in total

1.  Comparison of Micro-Leakage from Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorations in Cavities Prepared by Er:YAG (Erbium-Doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet) Laser and Conventional Method in Primary Teeth.

Authors:  Zahra Bahrololoomi; Forooghosadat Razavi; Ali Asghar Soleymani
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2014

2.  Assessment of Microleakage of a Composite Resin Restoration in Primary Teeth Following Class III Cavity Preparation Using Er, Cr: YSGG laser: An In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Priya Subramaniam; Annu Pandey
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2016-07-18

3.  The Effect of Er:YAG Laser Irradiation and Different Concentrations of Sodium Hypochlorite on Shear Bond Strength of Composite to Primary Teeth's Dentin.

Authors:  Zahra Bahrololoomi; Azam Dadkhah; Mohammadsadegh Alemrajabi
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2017-01-08

4.  Cavity Preparation by Laser in Primary Teeth: Effect of 2 Levels of Energy Output on the Shear Bond Strength of Composite Restoration to Dentin.

Authors:  Mehrsa Paryab; Shahrzad Sharifi; Mohammad Javad Kharazifard; Nazanin Kumarci
Journal:  J Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2018-07-06

5.  Clinical effects of laser-based cavity preparation on class V resin-composite fillings.

Authors:  Markus Heyder; Bernd Sigusch; Christoph Hoder-Przyrembel; Juliane Schuetze; Stefan Kranz; Markus Reise
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-23       Impact factor: 3.752

6.  Fracture resistance of root-filled teeth after cavity preparation with conventional burs, Er: YAG and Er,Cr: YSGG lasers.

Authors:  Uğur Aydın; Fatih Aksoy; Samet Tosun
Journal:  Eur Oral Res       Date:  2018-05-01

7.  Application of Laser Irradiation for Restorative Treatments.

Authors:  Amin Davoudi; Maryam Sanei; Hamid Badrian
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2016-11-16

8.  Assessment of microleakage of class V restored by resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer and pit and fissure resin-based sealants following Er:YAG laser conditioning and acid etching: in vitro study.

Authors:  Emilie Luong; Amir Shayegan
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2018-05-30
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.