Published online Sep 30, 2002.
https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.5.502
The effect of sandwich technique using flowable composite resin base on the microleakagein class II cavities of molar
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the marginal adaptation of direct class II sandwich restoration with packable composites(P-60), resin modified glass ionomer cement(Fuji-II LC), flowable compomer(Dyract Flow), flowable composites(Filtek Flow) in comparison with total bond restorations. In addition, for sandwich restorations, influence of different sandwich techniques was also evaluated.
Large butt-joint box typed class II cavites with cervical margins 1mm below the cemento-enamel junction were cut into 70 extracted human molars. The cavities(7 groups, n=10) were filled using a closed/open sandwich restoration or total bond restoration technique with materials according to the manufacturer's recommandation using the single-component bonding agent for each system. Teeth were thermocycled 500 times between 5℃ and 55℃ with 30-second dwell time. The teeth were then coated with nail polish 1mm short of the restoration, placed in a 2% methylene blue for 24 hours, and sectioned with diamond wheel. Sections were examined with a stereoscope to determine the extent of microleakage. Dentine/Cementum margins were analyzed for microleakage on scale of 0(no leakage) to 4(entire axial wall) and interface between materials, on scale of 0(no leakage) to 3(axial wall). Results were evaluated with Kruskal Wallis Test, corrected for ties, to determine whether there were statistically significant differences among the seven groups. Pairs of groups were analyzed using the Student-Newman-Keuls Method and Dunn s Method.
The results were as follows:
1. All groups showed some micoleakage in cervical portion. But there were no microleakage in interface between materials.
2. Closed sandwich restorations with Fuji-II LC and Filtek Flow had significantly lower leakage rating than total restorations with only P-60. However, open sandwich restorations with Dyract Flow showed significantly higher (P<0.05).
3. Closed sandwich restorations had significantly lower leakage rating than total restorations. However open sandwich restoration s showed significantly higher (P<0.05).
4. Sandwich restorations with Fuji-II LC were lower leakage than only P-60, Filtek Flow, Dyract Flow. But there were no statistically differences among the materials.
From the results above, it could be concluded, closed sandwich restorations was effective in reducing microleakage of class II restorations. The best results showing the least microleakage were for the closed sandwich technique with Fuji-II LC and Filtek Flow.
Table 2
(Mean Rank)
Table 3
Open sandwich vs Closed sandwich
Table 4
(Mean Rank) Kruskal-Wallis Test
Table 5
(Student-Newman-Keul method)
Table 6
(Mean rank)(Kruskal-Wallis Test)
Table 7
(Dunn's method)
References
-
Cirm GA, Kenneth WC. Reducing microleakage in class II restorations: An in vitro study. Quintessence Int 1994;25:781–785.
-
-
Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, Burgersdijk RC. Microleakage of class II box-type composite restoration. Am J Dent 1998;11(4):160–164.
-
-
Borgmeier PJ, Kreulen CM, van Amerongen WE, Akerboom HB, Gruythuysen RJ. The prevalence of postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations. ASDC J Dent Child 1991 9-10;58:378–383.
-
-
Tung FF, Estafan D, Scherer W. Microleakage of condensible resin composites: An in Vitro Investigation. Quintessence Int 2000;31:430–434.
-
-
Leinfelder KF, Radz GM, Nash RW. A report on a new condensable composite resin. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1998;19:230–237.
-
-
Crim GA, Chapman KW. Reducing Microleakage in Class II restoration: An in vitro study. Quintessence Int 1994;25:781–785.
-
-
De Goes MF, Rubbi E, Baffa O, Panzeri H. Optical transmittance of curing reflecting wedges. Am J Dent 1992;5(2):78–80.
-
-
Rodrigues JA. In vitro microleakage of glass ionomer composite resin hybrid materials. Oper Dent 1999;24:89–95.
-
-
Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E. Class II composite resin restorations using glass ionomer liners: microleakage studies. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996;21:67–71.
-
-
Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent 2001;26:302–307.
-
-
Estafan AM, Estsfan D. Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2000;21(9):705–708. 710, 712.quiz 714.
-
-
Estafan AM, Estsfan D. Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2000;21(9):705–708. 710, 712.quiz 714.
-
-
Shortall A, Asmussen E. Influence of dentin-bonding agents and a glass ionomer the cervical marginal seal of class II composite restorations. Scand J Dent Res 1988;26:590–594.
-
-
Dietschi D, De Siebenthal G, Neveu-Rosenstand L. Influence of restorative technique and new adhesives on the dentin marginal seal adaptation of resin composite class II restorations: An In vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int 1995;26:717–727.
-
-
Meyer JM, Cattani-Lrente MA, Dupuis V. Compomer: Between glass ionomer cements and composite resins. Biomaterials 1988;19:529–539.
-
-
Hinoura K, Moore BK, Phillips RW. Tensile bond strength between glass ionomer cements and composite resins. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;114:167–172.
-
-
Mangum FL, Ebb AB, Udayan K, Parikh BS, David L. Optima etchaing time of glass ionomer cemnet for maximum bond of composite resin. J Am Dent Assoc 1990;120:535–538.
-
-
Reid JS, Saunders WP. An in-vitro investigation of microleakage and gap size of glass ionomer/composite resin "sandwich" restoration in primary teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 1994;7-8:255–258.
-
-
Mount GJ, Hume WR. In: Kno BDPreservation and Restoration of Tooth.
-
-
Aarnts MP, Akimade A, Feilzer AJ. Effect of filler load on contraction stress and volumetric shrinkage. J Dent Res 1999;78:3014.
-