Indira Priyadarshini Bollu1, Archana Hari2, Jayaprakash Thumu3, Lakshmi Deepa Velagula4, Nagesh Bolla5, Sujana Varri6, Srikanth Kasaraneni7, Siva Venkata Malathi Nalli1. 1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, St. Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India . 2. Senior Lecturer, Department of Periodontics, St. Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India . 3. Professor and Head of Department, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, St. Joseph Dental College & Hospital , Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India . 4. Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Lenora Institute of Dental Sciences , Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh, India . 5. Professor and Head of Department, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India . 6. Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry & Endodontics, Sibar Institute of Dental Sciences , Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India . 7. Consultant, Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon, Global Multispecialty Dental Care , Eluru, Andhra Pradesh, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Marginal integrity of adhesive restorative materials provides better sealing ability for enamel and dentin and plays an important role in success of restoration in Class V cavities. Restorative material with good marginal adaptation improves the longevity of restorations. AIM: Aim of this study was to evaluate microleakage in Class V cavities which were restored with Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC), Giomer and Nano-Ionomer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This in-vitro study was performed on 60 human maxillary and mandibular premolars which were extracted for orthodontic reasons. A standard wedge shaped defect was prepared on the buccal surfaces of teeth with the gingival margin placed near Cemento Enamel Junction (CEJ). Teeth were divided into three groups of 20 each and restored with RMGIC, Giomer and Nano-Ionomer and were subjected to thermocycling. Teeth were then immersed in 0.5% Rhodamine B dye for 48 hours. They were sectioned longitudinally from the middle of cavity into mesial and distal parts. The sections were observed under Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope (CLSM) to evaluate microleakage. Depth of dye penetration was measured in millimeters. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The data was analysed using the Kruskal Wallis test. Pair wise comparison was done with Mann Whitney U Test. A p-value<0.05 is taken as statistically significant. RESULTS: Nano-Ionomer showed less microleakage which was statistically significant when compared to Giomer (p=0.0050). Statistically no significant difference was found between Nano Ionomer and RMGIC (p=0.3550). There was statistically significant difference between RMGIC and Giomer (p=0.0450). CONCLUSION: Nano-Ionomer and RMGIC showed significantly less leakage and better adaptation than Giomer and there was no statistically significant difference between Nano-Ionomer and RMGIC.
INTRODUCTION: Marginal integrity of adhesive restorative materials provides better sealing ability for enamel and dentin and plays an important role in success of restoration in Class V cavities. Restorative material with good marginal adaptation improves the longevity of restorations. AIM: Aim of this study was to evaluate microleakage in Class V cavities which were restored with Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC), Giomer and Nano-Ionomer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This in-vitro study was performed on 60 human maxillary and mandibular premolars which were extracted for orthodontic reasons. A standard wedge shaped defect was prepared on the buccal surfaces of teeth with the gingival margin placed near Cemento Enamel Junction (CEJ). Teeth were divided into three groups of 20 each and restored with RMGIC, Giomer and Nano-Ionomer and were subjected to thermocycling. Teeth were then immersed in 0.5% Rhodamine B dye for 48 hours. They were sectioned longitudinally from the middle of cavity into mesial and distal parts. The sections were observed under Confocal Laser Scanning Microscope (CLSM) to evaluate microleakage. Depth of dye penetration was measured in millimeters. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The data was analysed using the Kruskal Wallis test. Pair wise comparison was done with Mann Whitney U Test. A p-value<0.05 is taken as statistically significant. RESULTS: Nano-Ionomer showed less microleakage which was statistically significant when compared to Giomer (p=0.0050). Statistically no significant difference was found between Nano Ionomer and RMGIC (p=0.3550). There was statistically significant difference between RMGIC and Giomer (p=0.0450). CONCLUSION: Nano-Ionomer and RMGIC showed significantly less leakage and better adaptation than Giomer and there was no statistically significant difference between Nano-Ionomer and RMGIC.
Entities:
Keywords:
Beautifil II; Dye penetration; Ketac N 100; Marginal adaptation; Rhodamine B dye
Authors: R Condò; L Cerroni; G Pasquantonio; M Mancini; A Pecora; A Convertino; V Mussi; A Rinaldi; L Maiolo Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Mara Elena Rusnac; Cristina Gasparik; Alexandra Iulia Irimie; Alexandru Graţian Grecu; Anca Ştefania Mesaroş; Diana Dudea Journal: Med Pharm Rep Date: 2019-04-25
Authors: Amal Adnan Ashour; Mohammed Fareed Felemban; Nayef H Felemban; Enas T Enan; Sakeenabi Basha; Mohamed M Hassan; Sanaa M F Gad El-Rab Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) Date: 2022-06-02
Authors: J M F F Nunes; I A P Farias; C A Vieira; T M Ribeiro; F C Sampaio; V A Menezes Journal: Braz J Med Biol Res Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 2.590