Pontes Danielson Guedes, Guedes-Neto Manoel Valcacio, Cabral Maria Fernanda Costa, Cohen-Carneiro Flávia
Department of Operative Dentistry, State University of Amazonas, Rua Rio Mar 1203 / 901, Nossa Senhoras das Graças, Manaus, Amazonas 69053-120, Brazil; Tel: 559235842056; e-mail:
Oral Health Dent Manag. 2014 Sep;13(3):642-6.
The aim of this study was to evaluate in vitro the marginal microleakage of conventional Glass Ionomer Cements (GIC) and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cements (RMGIC). The tested materials were grouped as follows: GIC category - G1 (Vidrion R - SSWhite); G2 (Vitro Fill - DFL); G3 (Vitro Molar - DFL); G4 (Bioglass R - Biodinâmica); and G5 (Ketac Fill - 3M/ESPE); and RMGIC category - G6 (Vitremer - 3M/ESPE); G7 (Vitro Fill LC - DFL); and G8 (Resiglass - Biodinâmica). Therefore, 80 class V cavities (2.0X2.0 mm) were prepared in bovine incisors, either in the buccal face. The samples were randomly divided into 8 groups and restored using each material tested according to the manufacturer. The root apices were then sealed with acrylic resin. The teeth were stored for 24 h in 100% humidity at 37°C. After storage, the specimens were polished with extra-slim burs and silicon disc (Soft-lex - 3M/ESPE), then were isolated with cosmetic nail polish up to 1 mm around the restoration. Then, the samples were immersed in 50% AgNO3 solution for 12 h and in a developing solution for 30 min. They were rinsed and buccal-lingual sectioned. The evaluation of the microleakage followed scores from 0 to 3. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn method test were applied (a=0.05). The results showed that there was no difference between the enamel and dentin margins. However, GIC materials presented more microleakage than RMGIC.
本研究的目的是在体外评估传统玻璃离子水门汀（GIC）和树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀（RMGIC）的边缘微渗漏情况。测试材料分组如下：GIC类别 - G1（Vidrion R - SSWhite）；G2（Vitro Fill - DFL）；G3（Vitro Molar - DFL）；G4（Bioglass R - Biodinâmica）；以及G5（Ketac Fill - 3M/ESPE）；RMGIC类别 - G6（Vitremer - 3M/ESPE）；G7（Vitro Fill LC - DFL）；以及G8（Resiglass - Biodinâmica）。因此，在牛切牙的颊面制备了80个V类洞（2.0×2.0毫米）。样本被随机分为8组，并根据制造商的说明使用每种测试材料进行修复。然后用丙烯酸树脂密封牙根尖。将牙齿在37°C、湿度100%的条件下储存24小时。储存后，用超薄车针和硅片（Soft-lex - 3M/ESPE）对样本进行抛光，然后用指甲油在修复体周围1毫米范围内进行隔离。然后，将样本浸入50%的硝酸银溶液中12小时，再浸入显影液中30分钟。冲洗后进行颊舌向切片。微渗漏评估采用0至3分的评分标准。应用了Kruskal-Wallis检验和Dunn方法检验（α = 0.05）。结果表明，釉质边缘和牙本质边缘之间没有差异。然而，GIC材料的微渗漏比RMGIC更多。
