Rossi Rively Rodrigues, Aranha Ana Cecília, Eduardo Carlos de Paula, Ferreira Lisiane Soares, Navarro Ricardo S, Zezell Denise Maria
Professional Master Course of Lasers in Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
J Dent Child (Chic). 2008 May-Aug;75(2):151-7.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate microleakage of cavity preparation in primary teeth made with an Er, Cr:YSGG laser (L) or high-speed drill (HD) and conventional (CGIC) and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC).
One hundred primary teeth were divided into 10 groups (N=10): (a) groups 1 and 2 represented cavities prepared by a no. 1012 diamond bur with HD; (b) groups 3 through 10 represented cavities prepared with an Er, Cr:YSGG laser (with a repetition rate of 20 Hz power settings varying for enamel=2.5 W and 3 W and dentine=1.0 W and 1.5 W). After cavity preparation, samples were restored with CGIC (Ketac Molar Easy Mix) and RMGIC (Vitremer), impermeabilized, thermal cycled, stained, washed, and sectioned. The degree of dye penetration was scored by 3 standardized examiners using a light stereoscope at X30 magnification.
The Kruskal-Wallis test detected no statistical differences between the cavity preparation methods (P<.049). Neither of the GICs tested were able to avoid microleakage, and the RMGIC showed the lowest statistical degree of microleakage compared with CGIC for both types of cavity preparation.
The Er,Cr:YSGG laser provided an equivalent method of cavity preparation compared to the high-speed drill. The resin-modified glass ionomer cement showed the lowest degree of microleakage. This restorative material should be considered when choosing the cavity preparation method.
本研究旨在评估使用铒铬:钇-钪-镓石榴石激光(L)或高速钻(HD)制备乳牙洞形,并用传统玻璃离子水门汀(CGIC)和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀(RMGIC)修复后的微渗漏情况。
100颗乳牙被分为10组(每组n = 10):(a)第1组和第2组代表用1012号金刚石车针配合高速钻制备的洞形;(b)第3组至第10组代表用铒铬:钇-钪-镓石榴石激光制备的洞形(重复频率为20Hz,釉质功率设置为2.5W和3W,牙本质功率设置为1.0W和1.5W)。洞形制备完成后,样本分别用CGIC(Ketac Molar Easy Mix)和RMGIC(Vitremer)修复,进行封闭处理,热循环处理,染色,冲洗,然后切片。由3名经过标准化培训的检查人员使用放大30倍的光学体视显微镜对染料渗透程度进行评分。
Kruskal-Wallis检验未发现洞形制备方法之间存在统计学差异(P <.049)。所测试的两种玻璃离子水门汀均无法避免微渗漏,并且在两种洞形制备方式中,RMGIC相比CGIC均显示出统计学上最低程度的微渗漏。
与高速钻相比,铒铬:钇-钪-镓石榴石激光提供了一种等效的洞形制备方法。树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀显示出最低程度的微渗漏。在选择洞形制备方法时应考虑这种修复材料。