Department of Semiology and Clinics, Dental School, Federal University of Pelotas, Pelotas, RS, Brazil.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2010 Jan-Feb;18(1):37-43. doi: 10.1590/s1678-77572010000100008.
To evaluate the gingival marginal seal in class II composite restorations using different restorative techniques.
Class II box cavities were prepared in both proximal faces of 32 sound human third molars with gingival margins located in either enamel or dentin/cementum. Restorations were performed as follows: G1 (control): composite, conventional light curing technique; G2: composite, soft-start technique; G3: amalgam/composite association (amalcomp); and G4: resin-modified glass ionomer cement/composite, open sandwich technique. The restored specimens were thermocycled. Epoxy resin replicas were made and coated for scanning electron microscopy examination. For microleakage evaluation, teeth were coated with nail polish and immersed in dye solution. Teeth were cut in 3 slices and dye penetration was recorded (mm), digitized and analyzed with Image Tool software. Microleakage data were analyzed statistically by non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests.
Leakage in enamel was lower than in dentin (p<0.001). G2 exhibited the lowest leakage values (p<0.05) in enamel margins, with no differences between the other groups. In dentin margins, groups G1 and G2 had similar behavior and both showed less leakage (p<0.05) than groups G3 and G4. SEM micrographs revealed different marginal adaptation patterns for the different techniques and for the different substrates.
The soft-start technique showed no leakage in enamel margins and produced similar values to those of the conventional (control) technique for dentin margins.
评估不同修复技术在 II 类复合修复体边缘龈密合度。
在 32 颗健康第三磨牙的近中面制备 II 类盒状窝洞,龈缘位于牙釉质或牙骨质/牙本质。采用以下方法进行修复:G1(对照组):复合树脂,常规光固化技术;G2:复合树脂,软启动技术;G3:银汞合金/复合树脂联合修复(amalcomp);G4:树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀/复合树脂,开放式三明治技术。修复后的标本进行热循环。制作环氧树脂复制品并进行扫描电子显微镜检查涂层。为了评估微渗漏,牙齿被涂上指甲油并浸入染色溶液中。牙齿被切成 3 个切片,记录染色渗透(mm),数字化并用 Image Tool 软件进行分析。使用非参数 Kruskal-Wallis 和 Mann-Whitney 检验对微渗漏数据进行统计分析。
牙釉质渗漏低于牙本质(p<0.001)。G2 在牙釉质边缘的渗漏值最低(p<0.05),与其他组之间没有差异。在牙本质边缘,G1 和 G2 组表现出相似的行为,并且与 G3 和 G4 组相比,渗漏均较少(p<0.05)。SEM 显微照片显示,不同技术和不同基底的边缘适应性模式不同。
软启动技术在牙釉质边缘没有渗漏,并且在牙本质边缘产生与传统(对照)技术相似的值。