Suppr超能文献

使用各种修复材料对Ⅱ类洞修复体微渗漏的评估:一项对比研究。

Evaluation of Class II Restoration Microleakage with Various Restorative Materials: A Comparative Study.

作者信息

Pawar Madhura, Saleem Agwan Muhammad Atif, Ghani Bushra, Khatri Megha, Bopache Pooja, Aziz Mian Salman

机构信息

Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Dr. D. Y. Patil Dental College and Hospital, Dr. D. Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, Pune, Maharashtra, India.

Department of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry in Alrass, Qassim University, Qassim, KSA.

出版信息

J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2021 Nov;13(Suppl 2):S1210-S1214. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_359_21. Epub 2021 Nov 10.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The quest for a suitable esthetic material for tooth restoration has resulted in significant advancements in both material properties and application technique. Composites and acid-etch procedures are two significant advancements in esthetic restorative dentistry. Further research has strengthened composites' overall wear resistance and strength, but the problem of polymerization shrinkage has persisted. To reduce polymerization shrinkage and microleakage, a variety of techniques and material modifications have been suggested. The marginal leakage of amalgam, packable composite, flowable composite with packable composite, and high-viscosity traditional glass ionomer cement (GIC) was compared in this analysis to test the mentioned hypothesis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We chose 60 freshly extracted teeth and divided them into four classes of 15 teeth each. Class II cavities were prepared in a standardized manner. Group I was treated with amalgam, Group II with packable composite (GC G-aenial Posterior), Group III with flowable composite (G-aenial Universal Flo) as a liner and then restored with packable composite (GC G-aenial Posterior), and Group IV with high-viscosity traditional GIC (EQUI FORTE FILL). After that, the restorations were put through a thermocycling process. The specimens were soaked in 0.5% methylene blue dye before being cut into mesiodistal sections to assess microleakage at the gingival margin. After that, the parts were examined under a stereomicroscope. The degree of dye penetration was used to determine the score.

RESULTS

There was no microleakage in the control group, and the gap between the control and experimental groups was statistically significant ( = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

The glass hybrid restorative device had less gingival microleakage than the resin-based restorative material, indicating that it has a better sealing capacity. Clinical acceptability of glass hybrid restorative systems, on the other hand, must be confirmed with a larger sample size and trials.

摘要

背景与目的

对适用于牙齿修复的美学材料的探索推动了材料性能和应用技术的显著进步。复合材料和酸蚀程序是美学修复牙科领域的两项重大进展。进一步的研究增强了复合材料的整体耐磨性和强度,但聚合收缩问题依然存在。为减少聚合收缩和微渗漏,人们提出了多种技术和材料改性方法。本分析比较了汞合金、可压实复合材料、流动复合材料与可压实复合材料联合使用以及高粘度传统玻璃离子水门汀(GIC)的边缘渗漏情况,以验证上述假设。

材料与方法

选取60颗新鲜拔除的牙齿,将其分为四组,每组15颗。按照标准化方式制备Ⅱ类洞。第一组用汞合金治疗,第二组用可压实复合材料(GC G-aenial Posterior)治疗,第三组先用流动复合材料(G-aenial Universal Flo)作为衬层,然后用可压实复合材料(GC G-aenial Posterior)修复,第四组用高粘度传统GIC(EQUI FORTE FILL)治疗。之后,对修复体进行热循环处理。将标本浸泡在0.5%的亚甲蓝染料中,然后切成近远中截面,以评估牙龈边缘的微渗漏情况。之后,在体视显微镜下检查这些部分。根据染料渗透程度确定评分。

结果

对照组无微渗漏,对照组与实验组之间的差异具有统计学意义(P = 0.017)。

结论

玻璃混合修复装置的牙龈微渗漏比树脂基修复材料少,表明其具有更好的密封能力。另一方面,玻璃混合修复系统的临床可接受性必须通过更大样本量和临床试验来证实。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验