Juntavee Apa, Juntavee Niwut, Peerapattana Jomjai, Nualkaew Nartsajee, Sutthisawat Sitikorn
Associate Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Thailand, e-mail:
Associate Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Khon Kaen University, Thailand.
Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2013 May;6(2):75-9. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1193. Epub 2013 Aug 26.
It is important to emphasize that the aspects of pretreatment techniques, as well as the composition and mechanism of adhesion, may decisively influence the effectiveness of the restorative materials in sealing cavity margins and preventing marginal leakage.
This study assessed the in vitro influence of surface preparation techniques on the microleakage of glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth.
The study groups were divided into three different techniques: (1) The chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR) method using the Apacaries gel, (2) the erbium:yttrium aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser method and (3) the atraumatic restorative technique (ART). The teeth restored with a glass ionomer restorative material (Fuji IX GP capsule, GC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan). The dye penetration was measured in micrometers using a polarized light microscope and specific computer software.
The results showed that the mean microleakage level after was lowest with the CMCR method using Apacaries gel and highest with the Er:YAG laser. There was a statistically significant difference regarding the mean microleakage level between the group with the CMCR method using Apacaries gel and the Er:YAG laser.
Marginal leakage was significantly higher with preparations made using the Er:YAG laser than with the CMCR method using Apacaries gel and spoon excavator (p < 0.05). How to cite this article: Juntavee A, Juntavee N, Peerapattana J, Nualkaew N, Sutthisawat S. Comparison of Marginal Microleakage of Glass Ionomer Restorations in Primary Molars Prepared by Chemomechanical Caries Removal (CMCR), Erbium: Yttrium Aluminum-Garnet (Er:YAG) Laser and Atraumatic Restorative Technique (ART). Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2013;6(2):75-79.
必须强调的是，预处理技术的各个方面以及黏附的组成和机制，可能对修复材料封闭窝洞边缘和防止边缘渗漏的效果产生决定性影响。
本研究评估了表面处理技术对乳牙玻璃离子修复体微渗漏的体外影响。
研究组分为三种不同技术：（1）使用Apacaries凝胶的化学机械去龋（CMCR）方法，（2）铒：钇铝石榴石（Er:YAG）激光方法，（3）非创伤性修复技术（ART）。用玻璃离子修复材料（Fuji IX GP胶囊，日本东京GC公司）修复牙齿。使用偏光显微镜和特定计算机软件以微米为单位测量染料渗透。
结果显示，使用Apacaries凝胶的CMCR方法术后平均微渗漏水平最低，而Er:YAG激光组最高。使用Apacaries凝胶的CMCR方法组与Er:YAG激光组之间的平均微渗漏水平存在统计学显著差异。
使用Er:YAG激光进行的预备操作导致的边缘渗漏明显高于使用Apacaries凝胶和匙形挖器的CMCR方法（p < 0.05）。如何引用本文：Juntavee A, Juntavee N, Peerapattana J, Nualkaew N, Sutthisawat S. 化学机械去龋（CMCR）、铒：钇铝石榴石（Er:YAG）激光和非创伤性修复技术（ART）制备的乳牙玻璃离子修复体边缘微渗漏的比较。《国际临床儿科牙科学杂志》2013年；6(2):75 - 79。
