Abstract
ABSTRACT%Background: Conventional caries removal involves use of high-speed handpiece. Current concepts of caries excavation in cavitated lesions consist of manual excavators. Principles of minimal invasive approach indicate the need to excavate only carious tissue.Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the microleakage in conventional and resin modified glass ionomer cement restorations following conventional and chemomechanical caries removal.Design: Hundred class I carious human mandibular first molar s were collected and divided into two groups: I and II (50 each). Each group was further divided into subgroups, i.e. (IA, IB and IIA, IIB). Caries was completely removed using conventional method in group one and chemomechanically in group two. The teeth in group IA, IIA are restored with conventional glass ionomer comment (GIC) and in group IB, IIB restored with resign-modified glass ionomer comments (RMGIC), followed by fnishing and polishing. Subsequently, the specimens were thermocycled and then placed in dye solution. The teeth were sectioned through the restorations and evaluated for microleakage scores using a stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U-test.Results: Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in microleakage between the conventional GIC and RMGIC following conventional and chemomechanical caries removal method.Conclusion: Carisolv is minimally invasive and an effective alternative treatment for the removal of occlusal caries.How to cite this article: Pavuluri C, Nuvvula S, Kamatham RL, Nirmala SVSG. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Conventional and RMGIC Restorations following Conventional and Chemomechanical Caries Removal: An in vitro Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2014;7(3):172-175.
Highlights
Dental caries, one of the most common chronic oral infections, is the largest cause of tooth loss.[1,2] Conventional caries removal causes excessive loss of tooth structure
Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in microleakage between the conventional glass ionomer comment (GIC) and resign-modified glass ionomer comments (RMGIC) following conventional and chemomechanical caries removal method
In 25 teeth restored with conventional GIC (Fuji IX), one tooth showed dye penetration upto enamel, i.e. score 1
Summary
One of the most common chronic oral infections, is the largest cause of tooth loss.[1,2] Conventional caries removal causes excessive loss of tooth structure. There is an increased effort toward less invasive removal of caries lesions.[3] Minimally invasive dentistry is intended to preserve as much sound enamel and dentin as possible during caries removal.[3,4] Over the years techniques of caries removal include conventional caries removal, air abrasion with aluminum oxide, atraumatic restorative therapy (ART), Lasers and chemomechanical caries removal (CMCR).[4,5] Chemomechanical caries removal, a more minimalistic approach in treating caries has a considerable potential in the treatment of patients with management problems, especially in pediatric dentistry. Conventional caries removal involves use of high-speed handpiece. Principles of minimal invasive approach indicate the need to excavate only carious tissue
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
