| Literature DB >> 25284528 |
Danielson Guedes Pontes1, Manoel Valcacio Guedes-Neto, Maria Fernanda Costa Cabral, Flávia Cohen-Carneiro.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the marginal microleakage of conventional Glass Ionomer Cements (GIC) and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cements (RMGIC). The tested materials were grouped as follows: GIC category - G1 (Vidrion R - SSWhite); G2 (Vitro Fill - DFL); G3 (Vitro Molar - DFL); G4 (Bioglass R - Biodinâmica); and G5 (Ketac Fill - 3M/ESPE); and RMGIC category - G6 (Vitremer - 3M/ESPE); G7 (Vitro Fill LC - DFL); and G8 (Resiglass - Biodinâmica). Therefore, 80 class V cavities (2.0X2.0 mm) were prepared in bovine incisors, either in the buccal face. The samples were randomly divided into 8 groups and restored using each material tested according to the manufacturer. The root apices were then sealed with acrylic resin. The teeth were stored for 24 h in 100% humidity at 37°C. After storage, the specimens were polished with extra-slim burs and silicon disc (Soft-lex - 3M/ESPE), then were isolated with cosmetic nail polish up to 1 mm around the restoration. Then, the samples were immersed in 50% AgNO3 solution for 12 h and in a developing solution for 30 min. They were rinsed and buccal-lingual sectioned. The evaluation of the microleakage followed scores from 0 to 3. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn method test were applied (a=0.05). The results showed that there was no difference between the enamel and dentin margins. However, GIC materials presented more microleakage than RMGIC.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25284528
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oral Health Dent Manag ISSN: 2247-2452