Affiliation:
1. School of Dentistry, Department of Operative Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Abstract
Summary
Background: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the degree of microleakage on enamel and dentin margins of class V cavities prepared with either a high-speed drill or an Er,Cr:YSGG laser (2780 nm) and to associate their use with a beveling method for the margin.
Method and Materials: Sixty bovine incisors were randomly distributed into three groups. Group 1 (G1) cavities were laser prepared and bur beveled, group 2 (G2) cavities were bur prepared and beveled, while cavities of group 3 (G3) were laser prepared and beveled. Cavities were restored with selective enamel etching, using the same bonding agent and nano-hybrid resin composite for all groups. After thermocycling, microleakage was assessed using a methylene blue dye penetration method.
Results: Statistical analysis (Mann-Whitney, Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn’s multiple comparison tests) demonstrated significantly higher microleakage for dentin compared to enamel margins in G1. Enamel margin microleakage was found to be significantly higher at G3 compared to G1 (p=0.032) and G2 (p=0.001), while no significant differences were found between G1 and G2 (p=0.850). Regarding dentin margins, G2 group performed significantly better than G1 and G3 (p<<0.001), while there was no significant difference among G1 and G3 scores (p=1.000).
Conclusions: The conventional cavity preparation method seems to perform better in terms of microleakage than the Er,Cr;YSGG laser. Laser-prepared cavities could perform better in terms of microleakage if an additional step of enamel bur-beveling is performed prior to restoration.
Reference45 articles.
1. 1. Baghalian A, Nakhjavani YB, Hooshmand T, Motahhary P, Bahramian H. Microleakage of Er:YAG laser and dental bur prepared cavities in primary teeth restored with different adhesive restorative materials. Lasers Med Sci, 2013; 28:1453-1460.
2. 2. Lima AF, Soares GP, Vasconcellos PH, Ambrosano GM, Marchi GM, Lovadino JR, Aguiar FH. Effect of surface sealants on microleakage of Class II restorations after thermocycling and long-term water storage. J Adhes Dent, 2011; 13:249-254.
3. 3. Yaman BC, Guray BE, Dorter C, Gomeç Y, Yazıcıoglu O, Erdilek D. Effect of the erbium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser or diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of class V cavities restored with different adhesives and composite systems. Lasers Med Sci, 2012; 27:785-794.
4. 4. Korkmaz FM, Baygin O, Tuzuner T, Bagis B, Arslan I. The effect of an erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet laser on the microleakage and bond strength of silorane and micro-hybrid composite restorations. Eur J Dent, 2013; 7:33-40.
5. 5. Costa Pfeifer CS, Braga RR, Cardoso PE. Influence of cavity dimensions, insertion technique and adhesive system on microleakage of Class V restorations. J Am Dent Assoc, 2006; 137:197-202.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献