Abstract
Background. One of the problems with composite resin restorations is gap formation at resin‒tooth interface. The present study evaluated the effect of preheating cycles of silorane- and dimethacrylate-based composite resins on gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V restorations.Methods. In this in vitro study, standard Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 48 bovine incisors. For restorative procedure, the samples were randomly divided into 2 groups based on the type of composite resin (group 1: di-methacrylate composite [Filtek Z250]; group 2: silorane composite [Filtek P90]) and each group was randomly divided into 2 subgroups based on the composite temperature (A: room temperature; B: after 40 preheating cycles up to 55°C). Marginal gaps were measured using a stereomicroscope at ×40 and analyzed with two-way ANOVA. Inter- and intra-group comparisons were analyzed with post-hoc Tukey tests. Significance level was defined at P < 0.05.Results. The maximum and minimum gaps were detected in groups 1-A and 2-B, respectively. The effects of composite resin type, preheating and interactive effect of these variables on gap formation were significant (P<0.001). Post-hoc Tukey tests showed greater gap in dimethacrylate compared to silorane composite resins (P< 0.001). In each group, gap values were greater in composite resins at room temperature compared to composite resins after 40 preheating cycles (P<0.001).Conclusion. Gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V cavities decreased due to preheating of both composite re-sins. Preheating of silorane-based composites can result in the best marginal adaptation.
Highlights
Improvements in the properties of modern composite resins have resulted in their use for different dental restorative procedures
The present study evaluated the effect of preheating cycles of silorane- and dimethacrylate-based composite resins on gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V restorations
The maximum and the minimum marginal gaps were detected in the groups restored with dimethacrylate-based composite resin at room temperature and preheated silorane-based composite resin, respectively
Summary
Improvements in the properties of modern composite resins have resulted in their use for different dental restorative procedures. Used highly filled composite resins that have high viscosity pose problems in relation to placement in the cavity and adaptation.[4] One of the techniques suggested to solve the adaptation problems and reduction of microleakage is to use a liner of flowable composite resin before placing the conventional composite resin in the cavity preparation.[5] Flowable composite resins are not as durable as high-viscosity composite resins, due to their low filler content. One of the problems with composite resin restorations is gap formation at resin‒tooth interface. The present study evaluated the effect of preheating cycles of silorane- and dimethacrylate-based composite resins on gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V restorations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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: Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects
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.
