Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

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

DOI QR Code

THE EFFECT OF SANDWICH TECHNIQUE USING FLOWABLE COMPOSITE RESIN BASE ON THE MICROLEAKAGEIN CLASS II CAVITIES OF MOLAR

구치부 제2급 와동에서 고흐름성 복합레진을 이용한 적층 충전술식의 미세누출에 미치는 영향

  • Lee, Kang (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, Collage of Dentistry, Dankook University) ;
  • Hong, Chan-Ui (Dept. of Conservative Dentistry, Collage of Dentistry, Dankook University)
  • 이강 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 홍찬의 (단국대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실)
  • Published : 2002.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

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$^{\circ}C$ and 55$^{\circ}C$ 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 iou$.$or 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.

Keywords

References

  1. Cirm GA, Kenneth WC: Reducing microleakage in class II restorations: An in vitro study. Quintessence Int 1994;25:781-5
  2. Niek JMO, Joost JMR. Rob CWB: Microleakage of class II box-type composite restoration. American journal of Dentistry 1998;11(4):160-4
  3. Borgmeier PJ, Kreulen CM, van Amerongen WE, Akerboom HBM, Gruythuysen RJM: The prevalence of postoperative sensitivity in teeth restored with Class II composite resin restorations. J Dent for Children 1991;Sep-Oct:378-83
  4. Leinfelder KF, Bayne SC, Swift jr EJ: Packable Composites: Overview and technical considerations. J Esthet Dent 1999;11:234-49 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1999.tb00405.x
  5. Opdam NJM, Roeters FJM. Feilzer Aj. Verdonschot EH: Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in Class II resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent 1998;26(7):555-62 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00042-0
  6. Manhart J, Chen HY, Hickel R: The suitability of Packable resin-based composites for posterior restoration. JADA 2001;132:639-45
  7. Tung FF, Estafan D, Scherer W. Microleakage of condensible resin composites: An in Vitro Investigation. Dental Research 2000,31:430-4
  8. Leinfelder KF, Radz GM, Nash RW: A report on a new condensable composite resin Compendium 1998;19(3):230-7
  9. Leinfelder KF: New development in resin restorative system JADA 1997:128(5):573-81 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1997.0256
  10. Crim GA, Chapman KW: Reducing Microleakage in Class II restoration: An in vitro study. Quintessence international 1994:25:781-5
  11. Darbyshire Pa, Messer Lb. Douglas WH: Microleakage in Class II composite restorations bonded to dentin using thermal and load cycling. J Dent Res 1988;67(3):585-7 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345880670031201
  12. Prati C, Tao L, Simpsont M, Pashley DH: Permeability and microleakage of class II resin composite restoration. J Dent 1994;22(1) :49-56 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(94)90147-3
  13. Tjan AHL, Bergh BH, Lidner C. Effect of various incremental techniques on the marginal adaptation of class II composite resin restoration. J Prosthet Dent 1992;67:62-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90051-B
  14. Unterbrink GL, Muessner R: Influence of light intensity on two restorative system. J Dent 1995;23(3):183-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(95)93577-O
  15. De Goes MF, Rubbi E, Baffa O, Panzeri H: Optical transmittance of curing reflecting wedges. Am J Dent 1992:5(2):78-80
  16. Hirschfeld Z. Frenkel A: Marginal leakage of class II glass ionomer-composite resin restorations: An in vitro study. J Prosthet dent 1992;67:148-53 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(92)90445-G
  17. Dietrich TH. Losche AC, Losche GM: Marginal adaptation of direct composite and sandwich restorations in class II with cervical margins in dentine. J Dent 1999;27:119-128 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00035-9
  18. Rodrigues JA: In vitro microleakage of glass ionomer composite resin hybrid materials. Operative Dentistry 1999;24:89-95
  19. Hotta M, Aono M: Adaptation to the cavity floor of the light-cured glass ionomer cement base under a composite restoration. J of oral Rehabilitation 1994:21:679-685 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1994.tb01183.x
  20. Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E: Class II composite resin restorations using glass ionomer liners: microleakage studies. J Cin Pediatr Dent 1996;21:67-71
  21. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA: Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Operative Dentistry 2001;26:302-7
  22. Estafan AM, Estsfan : Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems. Compendium 2000;21(9):705-11
  23. Estafan AM, Estsfan : Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems. Compendium 2000;21(9):705-11
  24. Shortall A, Asmussen E: Influence of dentin-bonding agents and a glass ionomer the cervical marginal seal of class II composite restorations. J Dent Res 1988;26:590-4
  25. 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;26:717-27
  26. Lim CC, Neo J, Yap A: The influence of finishing time on the marginal seal of a resin-modified glass ionomer and polyacid-modified resin composite. J Oral Rehabil 1999;26:48-52 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1999.00323.x
  27. Meyer JM, Cattani-Lrente MA, Dupuis V. Compomer: Between glass ionomer cements and composite resins. Biomaterials. 1988;19:529-39 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-9612(97)00133-6
  28. Hinoura K. Moore BK, Phillips RW: Tensile bond strength between glass ionomer cements and composite resins. JADA 1987;114:167-72 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1987.0021
  29. Li J, Liu Y, Liu Y, S remark R, Sundstr m F: Flexure strength of resin-modified glass ionomer cements and their bond strength to dental composites. Acta Odontol Scand 1996;54:55-8 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359609003510
  30. Mangum FL, Ebb AB, Udayan K. Parikh BS, David L: Optima etchaing time of glass ionomer cemnet for maximum bond of composite resin. JADA 1990;120:535-38 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1990.0072
  31. Causton B, Sefton J, Williams A: Bonding class II composite to etched glass ionomer cement. Br Dent J 1987;163:321-6 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4806288
  32. Knibbs, P.J: Glass ionomer cement: 10 years of clinical use. J Oral Rehabil 1988;103-115
  33. Reid JS, Saunders WP: An in-vitro investigation of microleakage and gap size of glass ionomer/ composite resin 'sandwich' restoration in primary teeth. J of dentistry for children 1994; July-august:255-8
  34. 치질의 보존과 치아수복. Gj Mount. WR Hume 공저. 노병덕 역. 나래출판사
  35. Feilzer AJ, De Gee AJ, Davidson CL: Relaxation of polymerization contraction shear stress by hydroscopic expansion. J Dent Res 1990;69(1):36-9 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345900690010501
  36. Aarnts MP, Akimade A, Feilzer AJ: Effect of filler load on contraction stress and volumetric shrinkage. J Dent Res 1999;78:3014