An in vitro evaluation of the effects of desensitizing agents on microleakage of Class V cavities.

I Yikilgan,H Omurlu,O Bala,S Akgul,S Ozcan

doi:10.4317/jced.52755

I Yikilgan, H Omurlu + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.52755

Copy DOI

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a desensitizing agent on microleakage of Class V cavities.Material and Methods72 premolar teeth were used. There were 6 groups. Class V restorations were prepared with two different restorative materials (Equia fil, GC, America and Grandio, VOCO, Germany) and two adhesive systems (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray, Japan and S3 Bond Plus, Kuraray, Japan) with and without desensitizing agent (Gluma Desensitizer, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany). Restorations were polished with aluminum oxide abrasive discs. Then a range of 5 - 55C thermocycling was performed 10.000 times. The microleakage of restorations was examined with dye penetration method (Basic fuchsine). Bonferroni corrections and Kruskal-Wallis test were used to determine the significance of differences in occlusal and gingival dye penetration scores between groups.ResultsThere was no stastistical significance between the occlusal and gingival microleakage scores within the groups were shown.ConclusionsIt can be concluded that use of desensitizing agent under both high viscosity glass ionomer restorative materials and resin composites doesn’t affect the microleakage. Key words:High viscosity glass ionomer cement, composite resin, desensitizing agent, microleakage.

Highlights

Resin composites are usually preferred as restorative material on direct and indirect restorations by clinicians
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a desensitizing agent on microleakage of esthetic restorations and compare the sealing performance of the high viscosity glass ionomer cement with resin composites
When sub analysis was performed in order to examine the difference, the microleakage of Group I, II, III and IV are more significant than Group V and VI (p

Summary

Introduction

Resin composites are usually preferred as restorative material on direct and indirect restorations by clinicians. Post operative sensitivity seen after composite restorations can be occurred because of both removal of the smear layer and polymerization shrinkage of the materials. To prevent this case, it has recommended to use of flowable resin composites, resin modified glass ionomer cements as liner. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a desensitizing agent on microleakage of esthetic restorations and compare the sealing performance of the high viscosity glass ionomer cement with resin composites. Conclusions: It can be concluded that use of desensitizing agent under both high viscosity glass ionomer restorative materials and resin composites doesn’t affect the microleakage

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion