Hall versus conventional stainless steel crown techniques: in vitro investigation of marginal fit and microleakage using three different luting agents.

PURPOSE

This study's purpose was to investigate microleakage and marginal discrepancies in stainless steel crowns (SSCs) placed using conventional and Hall techniques and cemented with three different luting agents.

METHODS

Seventy-eight human primary maxillary second molars were randomly assigned to two groups (N=39), and SSCs were applied either with the Hall or conventional technique. These two groups were further subgrouped according to the material used for crown cementation (N=13 per group). Two specimens in each group were processed for scanning electron microscopy investigation. The extent of microleakage and marginal fit was quantified in millimeters on digitally photographed sections using image analysis software. The data were compared with a two-way independent and a two-way mixed analysis of variance (P=.05).

RESULTS

The scores in the Hall group were significantly worse than those in the conventional technique group (P<.05). In both groups, resin cement displayed the lowest extent of microleakage, followed by glass ionomer and polycarboxylate cements (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Stainless steel crowns applied using the Hall technique displayed higher microleakage scores than those applied using the conventional technique, regardless of the cementation material. When the interaction of the material and technique was assessed, resin cement presented as the best choice for minimizing microleakage in both techniques.