SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research) / 2007 / Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3

In vitro evaluation of microleakage properties of nanofilled composite resin and feldspathic ceramic inley restorations

Nanokompozit rezin ve feldspatik seramik direkt ve indirekt restorasyonların mikrosızıntı özelliklerinin in vitro değerlendirilmesi

Özlem TULUNOĞLU
İbrahim TULUNOĞLU
Rana Ciğer ÖZDEMİR
Pages
15–23
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The gingival microleakage scores were higher than occlusal scores in all groups and the differences were statistically significant (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate microleakage properties of ceramic inlay restorations prepared with direct and indirect methods using Celay Plus copy-milling system, direct nanofilled composite resin restorations and indirect nanofilled composite resin inlays.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Forty freshly extracted, noncarious, human 3rd molar teeth were randomly distributed to four groups (n=10/group).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The gingival microleakage scores were higher than occlusal scores in all groups and the differences were statistically significant (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate microleakage properties of ceramic inlay restorations prepared with direct and indirect methods using Celay Plus copy-milling system, direct nanofilled composite resin restorations and indirect nanofilled composite resin inlays. Material and Method: Forty freshly extracted, noncarious, human 3rd molar teeth were randomly distributed to four groups (n=10/group). Class II inlay cavities were prepared and then Group I specimens were restored with nanofilled composite resin (Filtek Supreme Universal, 3M ESPE, USA); indirect composite inlays were prepared for Group II; ceramic inlays produced with Celay Plus copy-milling system (Mikrona Technologie AG, Swiss) using both direct (Group III) and indirect technique (Group IV). The specimens were sectioned and the microleakage of basic fuchsine dye at occlusal and gingival margins was scored using a five-step scale. The data were evaluated with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests (p0.05). The gingival microleakage scores were higher than occlusal scores in all groups and the differences were statistically significant (p

Özet

Amaç: Sunulan in vitro çalışmada; Celay Plus Copy-Milling sistemi kullanılarak yapılan direkt ve indirektseramik inley restorasyonlar ile nanokompozit rezinkullanılarak yapılan direkt kompozit restorasyon veindirekt kompozit inleylerin, mikrosızıntı özellikleriaçısından değerlendirilmesi amaçlanmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntem: 40 adet çekilmiş, çürüksüz,insan daimi 3. molar dişi rasgele 4 gruba ayrılarak(n=10/grup) sınıf II kaviteler hazırlandı. Grup I örnekleredirekt nanokompozit rezin restorasyon (FiltekSupreme Universal, 3M ESPE, USA), Grup II örneklereindirekt kompozit restorasyon, Grup III örneklereCelay Plus sistem (Mikrona Technologie AG, Swiss)kullanılarak kopyalama işlemi ile direkt, Grup IVörneklere indirekt seramik inleylerle restorasyonlaryapıldı. Mikrosızıntı testinden elde edilen sonuçlarınistatistiksel analizi Kruskal-Wallis ve Mann WhitneyU testleri ile yapıldı.Bulgular: Kullanılan materyaller ve yöntemler mikrosızıntıaçısından karşılaştırıldığında, okluzal ve gingivalde,en düşük sızıntı değerleri direkt kompozit veindirekt kompozit inley, ardından indirekt seramikinley gruplarında gözlenmiş, en fazla sızıntı direktseramik inley grubunda tespit edilmiştir. İstatistikselolarak gruplar arasında anlamlı farklılık olmadığısaptanmıştır (p>0.05). Tüm gruplarda gingival kenar-lardaki mikrosızıntı değerleri, okluzal kenarlardakimikrosızıntı değerlerinden yüksektir ve farklılık istatistikselolarak anlam bulunmuşur (p

🔖

Cite This Article

TULUNOĞLU, Ö., TULUNOĞLU, İ., ÖZDEMİR, R. C. (2022). In vitro evaluation of microleakage properties of nanofilled composite resin and feldspathic ceramic inley restorations. Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research), Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 3, 15–23. https://ajindex.com/articles/651191

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of Microleakage around Dental Restorations: A Review. Oper Dent 1997; 22: 173–185
  2. Bullard RH, Leinfelder KF, Russel CM. Effect of Coefficient of Thermal Expansion on Microleakage. J Am Dent Assoc 1988; 116: 871–874
  3. Franco EB, Gonzaga Lopes L, Lia Mondelli RF, da Silva e Souza MH Jr, Pereira Lauris JR. Effect of the Cavity Configuration Factor on the Marginal Microleakage of Esthetic Restorative Materials. Am J Dent 2003; 16: 211–214
  4. Prati C, Nucci C, Montanari G. Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Dentin Bonding Systems. J Prosthet Dent 1991; 65: 401–407
  5. Rossomando KJ, Wendt SL Jr. Thermocycling and Dwell Times in Microleakage Evaluation for Bonded Restorations. Dent Mater 1995; 11: 47–51
  6. Trowbridge HO. Model Systems for Determining Biologic Effects of Microleakage. Oper Dent 1987; 12: 164–172
  7. Fortin D, Swift EJ Jr, Denehy GE, Reinhardt JW. Bond Strength and Microleakage of Current Dentin Adhesives. Dent Mater 1994; 10: 253–258
  8. Pashley DH. Clinical Considerations of Microleakage. J Endod 1990; 16: 70–77
  9. Tangsgoolwatana J, Cochran MA, Moore BK, Li Y. Microleakage Evaluation of Bonded Amalgam Restorations: Confocal Microscopy versus Radioisotope. Quintessence Int 1997; 28: 467–477
  10. Taylor MJ, Lynch E. Microleakage. J Dent 1992; 20: 3–10
  11. Collins CJ, Bryant RW. Clinical Evaluation of Posterior Composite Resin Restorations: Eight-Year Findings. J Dent Res 1995; 74: 404 (Abstract #31)
  12. Van Dijken JWV. 5–6 Year Evaluation of Direct Composite Inlays. J Dent Res 1994; 73: 327 (Abstract #1801)
  13. Wassell RW, Walls AW, McCabe JF. Direct Composite Inlays versus Conventional Composite Restorations: Three-Year Clinical Results. Br Dent J 1995; 179:343–349
  14. Schmidseder J. Color Atlas of Dental Medicine Aesthetic Dentistry. Thieme, Stuttgart, New York, 2000
  15. Roulet JF. Benefits and Disadvantages of Tooth-Coloured Alternatives to Amalgam. J Dent 1997; 25: 459–473
  16. Bergman MA. The Clinical Performance of Ceramic Inlays: A Review. Aust Dent J 1999; 44: 157–168
  17. Lucena-Martin C, Gonzalez-Rodriguez MP, Ferrer-Luque CM, Robles-Gijon V, Navajas JM. Influence of Time and Thermocycling on Marginal Sealing of Several Dentine Adhesive Systems. Oper Dent 2001; 26: 550-555
  18. Peutzfeldt A. Indirect Resin and Ceramic Systems. Oper Dent Supplement 2001; 6: 153–176
  19. Jones DW. Development of Dental Ceramics: An Historical Perspective. Dent Clin North Am 1985; 29: 621–644
  20. Kelly JR,