Department of Medical Biotechnologies, University of Siena.
Clinic for Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, University of Belgrade.
Dent Mater J. 2020 Aug 2;39(4):624-632. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2018-410. Epub 2020 Apr 16.
The study evaluated the quality of gingival margins created by cervical margin relocation (CMR) technique using different materials and assessed the consistency of the results obtained by two in vitro methods: microleakage test and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mesio-occlusal-distal cavities with subgingival proximal margins were prepared. Mesial margins were elevated supragingivally with total-etch adhesive and flowable composite (Group 1) or with universal adhesive and bulk-fill flowable composite (Group 2). Distal margins were not elevated. Teeth were restored with CAD/CAM overlays. Marginal quality was evaluated by microleakage test and SEM observation of epoxy resin replicas. Statistical analyses showed no significant correlations between microleakage scores and percentage of marginal integrity observed under SEM at CMR margins, lower microleakage scores at margins without CMR compared to CMR margins, lower microleakage scores in Group 2 than in Group 1 and no difference in SEM integrity between groups at CMR margins.
本研究评估了使用不同材料进行颈缘迁移(CMR)技术后龈缘质量,并通过两种体外方法:微渗漏试验和扫描电子显微镜(SEM)评估了结果的一致性。制备近中-𬌗-远中窝洞,龈下近中边缘。用全酸蚀粘结剂和流动复合树脂(第 1 组)或通用粘结剂和块状填充流动复合树脂(第 2 组)将近中边缘提升至龈上。远中边缘未提升。用 CAD/CAM 覆盖体修复牙齿。通过微渗漏试验和环氧树脂复制件的 SEM 观察评估边缘质量。统计分析显示,微渗漏评分与 SEM 观察到的 CMR 边缘边缘完整性百分比之间无显著相关性,与 CMR 边缘相比,无 CMR 边缘的微渗漏评分较低,第 2 组的微渗漏评分低于第 1 组,而 CMR 边缘两组之间的 SEM 完整性无差异。