Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia, Phone: +966 508866443, e-mail:
Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia.
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2024 Jan 1;25(1):58-61. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3595.
The aim of the current investigation was to evaluate the marginal microleakage of various esthetic restorative materials applied to primary teeth.
A total of 75 noncarious primary molars that were removed for orthodontic intervention and teeth nearing exfoliation were chosen. One millimeter (mm) above the cementoenamel junction, on the buccal surface of the teeth, Class V cavities were prepared. William's graded periodontal probe was used to standardize cavity preparation on all teeth. 3 mm was the cavity's length, 2 mm in width, and 2 mm in depth. The teeth were then divided into three groups (25 samples in each group) according to the type of esthetic restorative material used. Group I: Resin-modified glass ionomer cement, Group II: Ormocer, Group III: Giomer. The samples underwent 500 cycles of thermocycling, with an immersion time of 60 seconds and a well time of 15 seconds, between 5 and 55°C. The samples were submerged in methylene blue dye for 24 hours at room temperature and dried. The samples were then divided into sections and examined with a stereomicroscope. Data was recorded and statistically analyzed.
The least marginal microleakage was found in the ormocer group (1.22 0.01) followed by resin-modified glass ionomer cement group (1.31 0.07) and the giomer group (1.78 0.03). There was a highly statistically significant difference found between resin-modified glass ionomer cement group and the ormocer group, resin-modified glass ionomer cement group and giomer group. And no significant difference was found between the ormocer group and the giomer group.
The present study concluded that there was some amount of microleakage in primary teeth in all restorative materials examined in this investigation. However, the marginal sealing ability of ormocer was found highest compared to resin-modified glass ionomer cement and Giomer materials.
The primary reason dental restorations fail, particularly in Class V cavities, is microleakage since the margins of these restorations are typically found in the dentin or cementum. Assessing microleakage is a crucial step in determining the marginal integrity of restorative materials. Developing methods and resources that reduce the adverse effects caused by the restorative marginal seal failing would benefit from this. How to cite this article: Al Ghwainem A, Alqarni AS. Comparative Assessment of Marginal Micro Leakage of Different Esthetic Restorative Materials Used on Primary Teeth: An Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(1):58-61.
本研究旨在评估应用于乳牙的各种美学修复材料的边缘微渗漏情况。
选择因正畸干预而拔除的 75 颗非龋性乳磨牙和接近脱落的牙齿。在牙齿的颊面釉牙骨质界上方 1 毫米处制备 V 类窝洞。使用威廉牙周探针对所有牙齿进行标准化窝洞制备。窝洞的长度为 3 毫米，宽度为 2 毫米，深度为 2 毫米。然后根据使用的美学修复材料的类型将牙齿分为三组（每组 25 个样本）。第 I 组：树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀，第 II 组：奥莫科，第 III 组：硅烷酯。样本在 5 至 55°C 之间进行 500 次热循环，浸入时间为 60 秒，间隔时间为 15 秒。将样本在室温下用亚甲基蓝染料浸泡 24 小时，然后干燥。然后将样本分成几部分，用立体显微镜进行检查。记录数据并进行统计学分析。
奥莫科组的边缘微渗漏最小（1.22±0.01），其次是树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀组（1.31±0.07）和硅烷酯组（1.78±0.03）。树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀组和奥莫科组、树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀组和硅烷酯组之间存在高度统计学显著差异。奥莫科组和硅烷酯组之间无显著差异。
本研究表明，在所检查的所有修复材料中，乳牙均存在一定程度的微渗漏。然而，与树脂改良型玻璃离子水门汀和硅烷酯材料相比，奥莫科的边缘密封能力最高。
牙科修复体失效的主要原因，特别是在 V 类窝洞，是微渗漏，因为这些修复体的边缘通常位于牙本质或牙骨质中。评估微渗漏是确定修复材料边缘完整性的关键步骤。开发减少修复边缘密封失效引起的不利影响的方法和资源将从中受益。
Al Ghwainem A, Alqarni AS. 比较评估不同美学修复材料在乳牙中的边缘微渗漏：一项研究。当代牙科学杂志 2024;25(1):58-61.
