Omidi Baharan Ranjbar, Naeini Fatemeh Ferdowsizadeh, Dehghan Hajar, Tamiz Parvin, Savadroodbari Maryam Mohammadi, Jabbarian Razieh
Assistant Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry, Dental Caries Prevention Research Center, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
Assistant Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Kashan, Iran.
J Dent (Tehran). 2018 Jul;15(4):205-213.
Resin composites, glass ionomers (GIs), or a combination of these materials have gradually replaced silver amalgam in pediatric dentistry. The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of Class II (box only) cavity restorations with ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass, resin-modified GI (RMGI), and composite in primary molars.
A total of 65 primary molars with at least one intact proximal surface were selected in this in-vitro study. After debridement of each tooth, Class II (box only) cavities were prepared. Based on the type of the restorative material and the application of etching and bonding adhesives, the samples were categorized into five groups: (1) composite; (2) RMGI (Fuji II LC)+conditioner; (3) RMGI (Fuji II LC); (4) enhanced RMGI (ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass)+etching/bonding; and (5) ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass. The restored teeth were thermocycled for 2000 cycles. After embedding in an acrylic resin, the degree of dye penetration at axial and gingival walls was assessed using a stereomicroscope. The data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test.
Resin-based composite (RBC) Z250 showed the least microleakage, while RMGI showed maximum microleakage at axial walls. The mean degree of microleakage at gingival margins was the lowest in RBC Z250 and ACTIVA+etching/bonding groups and the highest in RMGI+conditioner and RMGI groups.
The microleakage of ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative material in the absence or presence of etching and bonding could be comparable to the microleakage of composites.
树脂复合材料、玻璃离子水门汀（GIs）或这些材料的组合已逐渐在儿童牙科中取代了银汞合金。本研究的目的是比较Activa生物活性修复玻璃、树脂改性玻璃离子水门汀（RMGI）和复合材料修复乳磨牙Ⅱ类（仅盒状洞形）窝洞的微渗漏情况。
在这项体外研究中，共选择了65颗至少有一个完整邻面的乳磨牙。对每颗牙齿进行清创后，制备Ⅱ类（仅盒状洞形）窝洞。根据修复材料的类型以及酸蚀和粘结剂的应用，将样本分为五组：（1）复合材料；（2）RMGI（富士Ⅱ LC）+调节剂；（3）RMGI（富士Ⅱ LC）；（4）增强型RMGI（Activa生物活性修复玻璃）+酸蚀/粘结；（5）Activa生物活性修复玻璃。将修复后的牙齿进行2000次热循环。在嵌入丙烯酸树脂后，使用体视显微镜评估轴向壁和牙龈壁的染料渗透程度。数据采用方差分析（ANOVA）和Tukey检验进行统计学分析。
树脂基复合材料（RBC）Z250的微渗漏最少，而RMGI在轴向壁的微渗漏最大。牙龈边缘的平均微渗漏程度在RBC Z250组和Activa+酸蚀/粘结组中最低，在RMGI+调节剂组和RMGI组中最高。
无论有无酸蚀和粘结，Activa生物活性修复材料的微渗漏情况与复合材料的微渗漏情况相当。
