Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2014.30.2.145

Effect of lining application techniques on microleakage in class II composite restorations  

Hwang, Byung-Moon (Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
Kim, Joo-Hyung (Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
Park, Ji-Man (Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
Millstein, Philip (Division of Biomaterials and Prosthodontics, Harvard School of Dental Medicine)
Park, Eun-Jin (Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
Publication Information
Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science / v.30, no.2, 2014 , pp. 145-151 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the microleakage in class II cavity resin restorations used with resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI) lining material depending on two different applying methods; classical delivery method using a dental explorer and a specially designed rotating bur. Materials and Methods: A total thirty-six extracted teeth were prepared with a class II proximal box, and randomly divided into three groups: 1) control group with no lining added and the proximal box restored (Group I), 2) the second group used RMGI as a lining material which was spread with an explorer (Group II), 3) the third group used a specially designed rotating bur to thin out RMGI (Group III). All teeth were restored with the same manner using incrementally placed resin composite. All 36 teeth were prepared and sectioned for the dye penetration test, and observed with a stereomicroscope for scoring the dye penetration. Results: When RMGI liners were used, both groups using an explorer and the special bur with the liner had significantly less microleakage than the control group with no liner (P < 0.05). The 50% of the group with RMGI liner using the bur showed no microleakage under a dye penetration test whereas all the teeth in control group showed microleakage of different degrees. However, there was no statistically significant difference between Group II and Group III. Conclusion: RMGI is an effective lining material to decrease microleakage in class II composite resin restorations regardless of applying methods.
Keywords
composite resins; glass ionomer cements; dental leakage; dental cavity preparation;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Nadig RR, Bugalia A, Usha G, Karthik J, Rao R, Vedhavathi B. Effect of four different placement techniques on marginal microleakage in class II composite restorations: an in vitro study. World J Dent 2011;2:111-16.   DOI
2 Guéders AM, Charpentier JF, Albert AI, Geerts SO. Microleakage after thermocycling of 4 etch and rinse and 3 self-etch adhesives with and without a flowable composite lining. Oper Dent 2006;31:450-5.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Kwon Y, Ferracane J, Lee IB. Effect of layering methods, composite type, and flowable liner on the polymerization shrinkage stress of light cured composites. Dent Mater 2012;28:801-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Abedian B, Millstein P. An effective method for spreading flowable composites in resin-based restorations. Oper Dent 2006;31:151-4.   DOI
5 Stockton LW, Tsang ST. Microleakage of Class II posterior composite restorations with gingival margins placed entirely within dentin. J Can Dent Assoc 2007;73:255.
6 Giachetti L, Scaminaci Russo D, Bambi C, Grandini R. A review of polymerization shrinkage stress: current techniques for posterior direct resin restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2006;7:79-88.
7 Choi KK, Condon JR, Ferracane JL. The effects of adhesive thickness on polymerization contraction stress of composite. J Dent Res 2000;79:812-7.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Jongsma LA, Kleverlaan CJ, Pallav P, Feilzer AJ. Influence of polymerization mode and C-factor on cohesive strength of dual-cured resin cements. Dent Mater 2012;28:722-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Roeters JM, Loomans BA. A retrospective clinical study on longevity of posterior composite and amalgam restorations. Dent Mater 2007;23:2-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Adams TC. A high-density posterior composite used for an amalgam replacement. Dent Today 1999;18:74-7.
11 Pamir T, Turkun M. Factors affecting microleakage of a packable resin composite: an in vitro study. Oper Dent 2005;30:338-45.
12 Roulet JF. The problems associated with substituting composite resins for amalgam: a status report on posterior composites. J Dent 1988;16:101-13.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Vicente A, Mena A, Ortiz AJ, Bravo LA. Water and saliva contamination effect on shear bond strength of brackets bonded with a moisture-tolerant light cure system. Angle Orthod 2009;79:127-32.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Kasraei S, Azarsina M, Majidi S. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-andrinse and self-etch dentin adhesive systems. Oper Dent 2011;36:213-21.   DOI
15 Gerdolle DA, Mortier E, Droz D. Microleakage and polymerization shrinkage of various polymer restorative materials. J Dent Child (Chic) 2008;75:125-33.
16 Tredwin CJ, Stokes A, Moles DR. Influence of flowable liner and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites. Oper Dent 2005;30:32-8.
17 Murray PE, Hafez AA, Smith AJ, Cox CF. Bacterial microleakage and pulp inflammation associated with various restorative materials. Dent Mater 2002;18:470-8.   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Gallo JR 3rd, Bates ML, Burgess JO. Microleakage and adaptation of Class II packable resin-based composites using incremental or bulk filling techniques. Am J Dent 2000;13:205-8.
19 Ferracane JL. Resin composite-state of the art. Dent Mater 2011;27:29-38.   DOI   ScienceOn