• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.456-468
• /
• 2008

This study was performed to evaluate the quality of newly offered dentin bonding system($AdheSE^{(R)}$ One) by comparing the degree of microleakage measured with those of several conventional adhesive materials(AQ Bond Plus and $Adper^{TM}$ Single Bond 2). The quality of hybrid layer and resin tags was analyzed by observing restoration/ tooth interface under SEM. All-in-one system is in the limelight for having advantage of reducing chair time of children with difficult behavior pattern. Therefore the possibility of clinical application of All-in-one system was evaluated. The results obtained are as follows; 1. At the enamel margin, group II(AQ Bond Plus) showed the highest value of microleakage, and the other groups showed decreased value in order of group III($AdheSE^{(R)}$ One) and I($Adper^{TM}$ Single Bond 2). There was statistically significant difference between group II and the others(p<0.05), and no statistical difference was found between group I and III. 2. At the dentin margin, microleakage value was increased in order of group II, I, III and significant difference between all groups(p<0.05). 3. In group I and III, microleakage value measured at the enamel margin was significantly lower than that seen at the dentin margin(p<0.05), and there was no statistical difference in group II. 4. Resin tags observed under SEM were very weak and tangled in group II and III while the strong and thick tags were observed in group I. In conclusion, careful case selection and accurate clinical application is recommended in using AQ Bond Plus and $AdheSE^{(R)}$ One, giving consideration of the results showing its higher microleakage and weaker strength than $Adper^{TM}$ Single Bond 2.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.263-272
• /
• 2001

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of four different light curing modes on the marginal leakage of Class V composite resin restoration. Eighty extracted human premolars were used. Wedge-shaped class Y cavities were prepared on the buccal surface of the tooth with high-speed diamond bur without bevel. The cavities were positioned half of the cavity above and half beyond the cemento-enamel junction. The depth, height, and width of the cavity were 2 mm, 3 mm and 2 mm respectively. The specimens were divided into 4 groups of 20 teeth each. All the specimen cavities were treated with Prime & Bond$^{R}$ NT dental adhesive system (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Germany) according to the manufacturer's instructions and cured for 10 seconds except group VI which were cured for 3 seconds. All the cavities were restored with resin composite Spectrum$^{TM}$ TPH A2 (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Germany) in a bulk. Resin composites were light-cured under 4 different modes. A regular intensity group (600 mW/${cm}^2$, group I) was irradiated for 30 s, a low intensity group (300 mW/${cm}^2$, group II) for 60 s and a ultra-high intensity group (1930 mW/${cm}^2$, group IV) for 3 s. A pulse-delay group (group III) was irradiated with 400 mW/${cm}^2$ for 2 s followed by 800 mW/${cm}^2$ for 10 s after 5 minutes delay. The Spectrum$^{TM}$ 800 (Dentsply DeTrey GmbH, Germany) light-curing units were used for groups I, II and III and Apollo 95E (DMD, U.S.A.) was used for group IV. The composite resin specimens were finished and polished immediately after light curing except group III which were finished and polished during delaying time. Specimens were stored in a physiologic saline solution at 37$^{\circ}C$ for 24 hours. After thermocycling (500$\times$, 5-55$^{\circ}C$), all teeth were covered with nail varnish up to 0.5 mm from the margins of the restorations, immersed in 37$^{\circ}C$, 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, and rinsed with tap water for 24 hours. After embedding in clear resin, the specimens were sectioned with a water-cooled diamond saw (Isomet$^{TM}$, Buehler Co., Lake Bluff, IL, U.S.A.) along the longitudinal axis of the tooth so as to pass the center of the restorations. The cut surfaces were examined under a stereomicroscope (SZ-PT Olympus, Japan) at ${\times}$25 magnification, and the images were captured with a CCD camera (GP-KR222, Panasonic, Japan) and stored in a computer with Studio Grabber program. Dye penetration depth at the restoration/dentin and the restoration/enamel interfaces was measured as a rate of the entire depth of the restoration using a software (Scion image, Scion Corp., U.S.A.) The data were analysed statistically using One-way ANOVA and Tukey's method. The results were as follows : 1. Pulse-Delay group did not show any significant difference in dye penetration rate from other groups at enamel and dentin margins (p>0.05) 2. At dentin margin, ultra-high intensity group showed significantly higher dye penetration rate than both regular intensity group and low intensity group (p<0.05). 3. At enamel margin, there were no statistically significant difference among four groups (p>0.05). 4. Dentin margin showed significantly higher dye penetration rate than enamel margin in all groups (p<0.05).

• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.438-446
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microleakage of composite resin($Z250^{(R)}$) and compomer(Dyract AP) cured with various curing lights(Elipar $TriLight^{(R)}$, $Flipo^{(R)}$, and Elipar FreeLight $2^{(R)}$). Box-shaped class V cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted human third molars. The sectioned specimens were evaluated for dye penetration and following results were obtained. 1. Regarding microleakage in the enamel margin with different curing light sources, there was no significant difference in Dyract AP whereas $Z250^{(R)}$ with $Flipo^{(R)}$ showed higher microleakage score than those of FreeLight $2^{(R)}$ or $TriLight^{(R)}$(p<0.05). 2. Regarding microleakage in the dentin margin with curing light sources, there were no significant differences in both Dyract AP and $Z250^{(R)}$(p>0.05). 3. Regarding microleakage in the enamel margin with filling materials. there were no significant differences in both filling materials with $Flipo^{(R)}$ whereas $Z250^{(R)}$ showed less microleakage than Dyract AP with FreeLight $2^{(R)}$ or $TriLight^{(R)}$ (p<0.05). 4. Regarding microleakage in the dentin margin with filling materials, there wer no significant differences in both filling materials with $TriLight^{(R)}$ whereas $Z250^{(R)}$ showed less microleakage than Dyract AP with FreeLight $2^{(R)}$ or $Flipo^{(R)}$ (p<0.05). 5. Enamel margin showed less microleakage than dentin margin when filled with Dyract AP and cured with $Flipo^{(R)}$ or FreeLight $2^{(R)}$ (p<0.05), but there were no statistically significant differences between the enamel and the dentin in the rest groups. This study suggested that $Z250^{(R)}$ showed lower microleakage score than Dyract AP. and that $Flipo^{(R)}$ showed higher microleakage score than FreeLight $2^{(R)}$ and $TriLight^{(R)}$ in the enamel margin filled with $Z250^{(R)}$.