Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

MICROLEAKAGE OF MICROFILL AND FLOWABLE COMPOSITE RESINS IN CLASS V CAVITY AFTER LOAD CYCLING

Flowable 및 microfill 복합레진으로 충전된 제 5급와동에서 load cycling 전,후의 미세변연누출 비교

  • Kang, Suk-Ho (Department of Conservative Dentistiry, College of dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kim, Oh-Young (Dept. of Polymer Science & Engineering) ;
  • Oh, Myung-Hwan (Dept. of Polymer Science & Engineering, Dankook University, Vericom Co., Ltd.) ;
  • Cho, Byeong-Hoon (Department of Conservative Dentistiry, College of dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Um, Chung-Moon (Department of Conservative Dentistiry, College of dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Kwon, Hyuk-Choon (Department of Conservative Dentistiry, College of dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Son, Ho-Hyun (Department of Conservative Dentistiry, College of dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • 강석호 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 김오영 (단국대학교 공과대학 고분자공학과) ;
  • 오명환 ((주)베리콤) ;
  • 조병훈 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 엄정문 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 권혁춘 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 손호현 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실)
  • Published : 2002.03.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Low-viscosity composite resins may produce better sealed margins than stiffer compositions (KempScholte and Davidson, 1988: Crim, 1989). Plowable composites have been recommended for use in Class V cavities but it is also controversial because of its high rates of shrinkage. On the other hand, in the study comparing elastic moduli and leakage, the microfill had the least leakage (Rundle et at. 1997) Furthermore, in the 1996 survey of the Reality Editorial Team, microfills were the clear choice for abfraction lesions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microleakage of 6 compostite resins (2 hybrids, 2 microfills, and 2 flowable composites) with and without load cycling. Notch-shaped Class V cavities were prepared on buccal surface of 180 extracted human upper premolars on cementum margin. The teeth were randomly divided into non-load cycling group (group 1) and load cycling group (group 2) of 90 teeth each. The experimental teeth of each group were randomly divided into 6 subgroups of 15 samples. All preparations were etched, and Single bond was applied. Preparations were restored with the following materials (n=15) : hybrid composite resin [Z250(3M Dental Products Inc. St. Paul, USA), Denfil(Vericom, Ahnyang, Korea)], microfill [Heliomolar RO(Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein), Micronew(Bisco Inc. Schaumburg, IL, USA)], and flowable composite［AeliteFlo(Bisco Inc. Schaumburg, IL, USA), Revolution(Kerr Corp. Orange, CA, USA)]. Teeth of group 2 were subjected to occlusal load (100N for 50,000 cycles) using chewing simulator(MTS 858 Mini Bionix II system, MTS Systems Corp. Minn. USA). All samples were coated with nail polish 1mm short of the restoration, placed in 2％ methylene blue for 24 hours, and sectioned with a diamond wheel. Enamel and dentin/cementum margins were analyzed for microleakage on a sclale of 0 (no leakage) to 3 (3/3 of wall). Results were statistically analyzed by Kruscal-Wallis One way analysis, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Student-Newmann-Keuls method. (p = 0.05) Results : 1. There was significantly less microleage in enamel margins than dentinal margins of all groups (p＜0.05) 2. There was no significant between six composite resin in enamel margin of group 1. 3. In dentin margin of group 1, flowable composite had more microleakage than others but not of significant differences. 4. there was no significant difference between six composite resin in enamel margin of group 2. 5. In dentin margin of group 2, the microleakage were R＞A =H=M＞D＞Z. But there was no significant differences. 6. In enamel margins, load cycling did not affect the marginal microleakage in significant degree. 7. In enamel margins, load cycling did affect the marginal microleakage only in Revolution. (p＜0.05).

Keywords

References

  1. Carvalho RM, Pereira JC, Yoshiyama M, et al. A review of polymerization contraction: The influence of stress development versus stress relief. Oper Dent 1996:21:17-24
  2. Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Quantitative determination of stress reduction by flow in composite restorations. Dent Mater 1990:6: 167-171 https://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(90)90023-8
  3. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Marginal integrity related to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems. J Prothet Dent 1990:64:658-664 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90291-J
  4. Lee W. C., Eakle W. S. Possible role of tensile stress in the etiology of cervical erosive lesions of teeth. J Prothet Dent 1984:374-380
  5. Goel V. K., Khera S. C., Ralston J. L., Chang K. H. Stresses at the dentinoenamel junction of human teeth-a finite element investigation. J Prothet Dent 1991;66:451-459 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(91)90504-P
  6. Grippo J. O., Abfractions. A new classification of hard tissue lesions of teeth. J Esthet Dent 1991:3:14-19 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1991.tb00799.x
  7. Qvist V. The effect of mastication on marginal adaptation of composite restorations in vivo. J Dent Res 1983:62(8): 904-906 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345830620081101
  8. Labella R. et al. Polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composite and filled adhesives. Dent Mater 1999:15: 128-137 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(99)00022-6
  9. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ Jr, et al. A characterization of first-generation flowble composites. lADA 1998;129: 567-577
  10. Esafan AM, Estafan D. Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems. Compendium 2000:21(9): 705-712
  11. Bonner PB. New developments in composite resins. Dentistry Today 1997:16(4): 44-47
  12. Rada RE. The versatility of flowable composites. Dentistry Today 1998:17(4): 78-83
  13. Burgess JO. Norling BK, Rawls HR, Ong JL. Directly placed esthetic restorative materials- The continuum. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1996:17(8): 731-734
  14. Miller MB. Restoring class V lesions part 2: Abfraction lesions. PPAD 1997:9(5): 505-506
  15. Rundle T, Cobb D, Vargas M, Effect of elastic modulus on microleakage of Class V restorations. J Dent Res 1997;76:(Abstract #1455)
  16. Heymann H. O., Sturdevant J. R., Bayne S.. Wilder A. D.. Sluder T. B., Brunson W. D. Examining tooth flexure effects on cervical restorations : A two-year clinical study. J Am Dent Assoc 1991;122:41-47 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-8177(91)25015-1
  17. Leinfelder K. F. Restoration of abfracted lesions. Compendium 1994; 15(11): 1396-1400
  18. Going R. E. Microleakage around dental restorations: a summarizing review. JADA 1972; 84: 1349-1356 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1972.0226
  19. Yap A.. Stokes A.N., Pearson G.J. An in vitro microleakage study of a new multi-purpose dental adhesive system. J Oral Rehab 1996;23: 302-308 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1996.tb00857.x
  20. Ahlgren J., Owall B. Muscular activity and chewing force: A polygraphic study of human mandibular movements. Archs Oral BioI 1970;15: 271-280 https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9969(70)90053-1

Cited by

  1. Effect of a new resin monomer on the microleakage of composite resin restorations vol.32, pp.5, 2007, https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2007.32.5.469