Cavities In Primary Molars Research Articles

Is use of flowable resin composite an option for occluso-proximal restorations in primary teeth? A fracture strength analysis.

Use of flowable resin composites for ocluso-proximal restorations in primary molars could improve cervical adaptation, and reduce the failure risk. To investigate the fracture strength of occluso-proximal restorations in primary teeth using different flowable resin composites (as an intermediate layer or entire cavity) and a conventional resin composite (incremental technique). Two standardized occluso-proximal cavities were prepared on mesial and distal surfaces of 50 sound primary molars. The teeth were randomly assigned into five groups (n = 10): 2 mm Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Z350 XT; 4 mm Filtek Bulk Fill Flow; 2 mm Z350 XT Flow + Z350 XT; 4 mm Z350 XT Flow; and Z350 XT inserted by incremental technique. All restored teeth were subjected to cariogenic challenge and then submitted to fracture strength test. The failure pattern of each specimen was categorized as reparable or irreparable/need for replacement based on the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Fracture strength means were submitted to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc tests. Failure pattern was analyzed descriptively. There was no statistically significant difference on fracture strength among groups (p = .48). A similar distribution of reparable (35%-40%) and irreparable (60%-65%) failures was observed among groups. Based on a laboratorial setting, the use of different flowable resin composites (as an intermediate layer or entire cavity) may be an option to restore occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars.

Comparative Evaluation of GC Gold Label IX with GC Gold Label IX Extra and GC Gold Label Hybrid in Cavitated Lesions Prepared by Hand Instrumentation Technique in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study.

The purpose of the present study was to compare the clinical efficacy of GC Gold Label IX, GC Gold Label IX Extra, and GC Gold Label Hybrid in occlusal surface cavities in primary molars prepared by hand instrumentation technique. Ninety primary molars were selected from the children according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected teeth were randomly allocated into the following three groups, with 30 teeth in each group, according to the restorative material used: group I: GC Gold Label IX, group II: GC Gold Label IX Extra, and group III: GC Gold Label Hybrid. Occlusal cavities were prepared using hand instruments. Caries removal efficacy was verified using caries detector dye. The restorative materials were mixed and condensed into the prepared cavities. The restorations were assessed using modified United States Public Health Service (USPHS) evaluation criteria at 1, 3, and 6 months. The results were tabulated and statistically analyzed using the Chi-squared test. No significant difference was found in terms of color match, marginal discoloration, marginal integrity, surface roughness, and secondary caries, but a significant difference was observed in terms of retention and anatomic form between group I and group III. GC Gold Label Hybrid exhibited better clinical performance with respect to GC Gold Label IX and comparable clinical performance with respect to GC Gold Label IX Extra. GC Gold Label Hybrid is a newly developed glass ionomer cement (GIC), and its clinical performance needs to be studied. Mittal M, Bajaj N, Bhola M, et al. Comparative Evaluation of GC Gold Label IX with GC Gold Label IX Extra and GC Gold Label Hybrid in Cavitated Lesions Prepared by Hand Instrumentation Technique in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2024;17(5):570-575.

Comparative evaluation of microleakage in glass hybrid resin, alkasite resin, and shock-absorbing rubber resin in primary molars– An in-vitro study

Background To evaluate and compare the microleakage of Glass hybrid resin (Equia Forte), Alkasite resin (Cention N), and Fluoride-releasing shock-absorbing rubber resin (Activa Bioactive) in Class V cavities of primary molars. Material and Methods Thirty freshly extracted human primary molar teeth with pre-shedding mobility were selected and a standard class V cavity was prepared on the buccal surfaces of all teeth. The teeth were divided into 3 groups of 10 samples each. The prepared cavities of all samples were restored with their corresponding restorative material. The teeth underwent thermocycling for 500 cycles and were then immersed in the toluidine dye solution. The depth of dye penetration scores between and within 3 groups was analyzed using the Kruskal Wallis One-way ANOVA test, followed by multiple comparisons with the Dunn-Bonferonni post hoc test. Results Cention N (alkasite resin) showed the least depth of dye penetration, which was highly statistically significant (p=0.000), followed by Activa Bioactive (Fluoride-releasing shock-absorbing rubber resin) and Equia Forte (Glass Hybrid resin). No samples showed depth involving the pulpal floor. Conclusion Cention N (alkasite resin) restorative material had the least microleakage and may be an excellent alternative material that provides a long-term clinical solution for the restoration of carious teeth with its improved marginal seal and reduced chances of microleakage. Clinical Significance Cention N may be an excellent alternative material that provides a long-term clinical solution for the restoration of carious teeth with its improved marginal seal and reduced chances of microleakage. Key Words: Activa Bioactive, Cention N, Equia forte, Microleakage, Resin cements

A Comparative Study to evaluate the Clinical Efficacy of a Novel Alkasite-based Material (Cention N), Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement, and Composite Resin for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: A Randomized Control Trial

A Comparative Study to evaluate the Clinical Efficacy of a Novel Alkasite-based Material (Cention N), Resin-modified Glass Ionomer Cement, and Composite Resin for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: A Randomized Control Trial

Marginal Integrity of Simplified Adhesive Strategies in Primary Teeth

The aim of this research was to investigate the effect of simplified adhesive strategies (self-etch vs selective enamel etch and 10- vs 20-second adhesive application time) on the marginal integrity in primary molars. Forty deep class-II cavities were prepared in 40 extracted primary molars. The molars were divided into 4 groups based on the applied universal adhesive strategy as follows: groups 1 and 2: selective enamel etch with 20- or 10-second application time and groups 3 and 4: self-etch with 20- or 10-second application time. All cavities were restored with a sculptable bulk-fill composite restoration. The restorations underwent a thermomechanical loading (TML, 5-50 °C, 2-minute dwelling time, ×1000; 400,000 loading cycles, 1.7 Hz, 49 N). Marginal analysis before and after TML was conducted with scanning electron microscopy and the marginal integrity of each restoration was calculated as a percentage of continuous margins. A beta regression model was adopted to statistically analyse the data with a consequent pairwise comparison. The mean marginal integrity (% ± SD) of the restorations for each tested adhesive strategy after TML was as follows: selective enamel etch/20 seconds=85.4 ± 3.9, self-etch/20 seconds=85.3 ± 5.2, self-etch/10 seconds=80.1 ± 8.2, and selective enamel etch/10 seconds=80.0 ± 8.5. The difference between both adhesive strategies was not statistically significant at the same application time. The difference between both application times within the same adhesive strategy was statistically significant (P ≤ .01). Universal adhesives applied either in selective enamel etch or in self-etch mode result in comparable marginal integrities when restoring class-II cavities in primary molars. Shortened adhesive application time (10 seconds) could lead to a reduction in the marginal integrity in comparison to the recommended application time of 20 seconds.

Marginal Quality and Wear of Bulk-fill Materials for Class-II Restorations in Primary Molars.

The aim of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the marginal integrity and wear of eight bulk-fill materials in comparison to a compomer in Class-II cavities in primary molars after thermomechanical loading (TML). Prepared Class-II cavities in 72 extracted primary molars were filled with eight bulk-fill materials. A compomer served as the control group. After water storage (incubator, 28 days, 37°C), samples were subjected to TML (2500 thermal cycles 5°C/55°C; 100,000 load cycles, 50 N, 1.67 Hz). Before and after TML, replicas were made which were used for both SEM analysis of marginal integrity and 3-D wear analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests (p < 0.05). A significant reduction in perfect margins was observed for all groups, while marginal gap formation increased (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.02) for all groups but the compomer. Significant interindividual differences were observed between the tested materials regarding marginal integrity (Kruskal-Wallis test, p < 0.05). Wear analysis revealed no significant differences between groups (Kruskal-Wallis test, p > 0.05). Some of the bulk-fill materials investigated here achieved better results than the compomer and should be further evaluated clinically.

Does treating proximal cavities in primary molars non-restoratively affect intra-arch space and alignment of successor teeth negatively? A 4-year longitudinal study.

BackgroundRemoving plaque with toothbrush and toothpaste from proximal cavities in primary molars without restoring them follows sound cariological principles. But does this treatment affect space for and alignment of their permanent successors negatively?HypothesisThere is no difference in impaction and displacement of the premolars, as well as in the D+E space in quadrants with three different statuses of the proximal surface of primary molars over a 4-year period.MethodsA total of 936 quadrants (466 maxillary and 470 mandibular quadrants) in 233 children were assessed. Treatment of cavities in the proximal surfaces of the primary molars consisted of amalgam and ART restorations using high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement, and cleaning of open large- and medium-sized cavities with toothbrush and toothpaste (UCT) under supervision for 220 days per year over 3 years. Dental casts were made at baseline, and after two, three, and 4 years. The D+E spaces were measured digitally. Status of the proximal surface of the primary molars was assessed by two calibrated examiners, and quadrants were grouped into normal anatomy, defective restoration, and proximal cavity. ANCOVA, ANOVA and LSD tests were applied.ResultsThere was a statistically significant difference between groups (p <= 0.001) and between evaluation times (p < 0.001), for the D+E space in both the maxilla and mandible. A sex difference related to the D+E space in the maxilla was found (p = 0.007). For boys, quadrants in the maxilla of the group ‘proximal cavity’ showed a significant shorter D+E space when compared to quadrants of the group ‘normal anatomy’ at the 3- and 4-year evaluation time. For girls the difference between the two groups was only present at the 3-year evaluation time. There was no significant difference between the D+E space in quadrants with defective restorations and those with normal anatomy in the mandible and in the maxilla. Displacement and impaction of the premolars showed no significant difference between groups.ConclusionPrimary molars with open proximal cavities that are cleaned with toothbrush and toothpaste do not result in displacement and impaction of the successor teeth, neither do primary molars with defective restorations in proximal tooth surfaces.

ART restorations for occluso-proximal cavities in primary molars: a two-year survival and cost analysis of an RCT comparing two GIC brands

There are many glass ionomer cements available on the Brazilian market for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), however, there is still a gap in the literature regarding their cost-effectiveness. Objectives To evaluate the influence of restorative materials (Ketac Molar, 3M ESPE; and Vitro Molar, Nova DFL) in the two-year survival rate and cost-effectiveness of occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Methodology A total of 117 children (aged four to eight years) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in primary molars were selected and randomly divided in treatment groups (KM or VM) in this parallel randomized controlled trial. Treatments followed ART premises and were conducted in public schools by trained operators in Barueri, Brazil. A trained, calibrated, and blinded examiner performed the evaluations after two, six, 12, and 24 months (k=0.92). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate restoration survival and Cox regression was used to test the association with clinical factors (α=5%). For cost analysis, material and professional costs were considered. Monte Carlo analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness plane and bootstrapping was used to compare material costs over the years. Results The overall survival rate was 36.9% after two years (48.6% for KM and 25.4% for VM). Restorations with VM failed more than those with KM (HR=1.70; 95% CI=1.06–2.73; p=0.027). VM presented lower initial cost, but no difference was observed between groups considering the two-year incremental cost. Conclusion After a two-year evaluation, KM proved to be a better option than VM for occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02267720

¿Pueden las restauraciones de resina bulk-fill ser una alternativa a las restauraciones de cemento de ionómero de vidrio modificado con resina en los molares primarios en niños preescolares? Un protocolo de ensayo clínico aleatorizado

Background: The aim of this study was to elaborate a randomized clinical trial protocol to evaluate the effectiveness of class I restorations in resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and bulk-fill resin in primary molars with untreated early childhood caries in toddlers. Material and Methods: A total of 59 toddlers up to 36 months old with at least two primary molar teeth with untreated dental caries of single surface on different sides of the mouth will be selected at the Pediatric Dentistry Clinics of the Faculty of Dentistry at Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Brazil. Teeth with untreated dental caries in the left and right sides of each patient’s mouth will be randomly distributed into 2 groups: Group 1 (Control): encapsulated RMGIC restoration with Riva light cure (SDI, Florida, USA) and Group 2 (Test): Filtek bulk-fill composite resin restoration (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, USA) with universal single bond adhesive system (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, USA). A single trained dentist will perform all restorative procedures. The restorations will be evaluated after 1, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months by two trained and calibrated examiners. Cost-efficacy analysis will be carried out. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Log-rank test, Cox regression, Poisson regression analysis, Mann-Whitney test or Kruskal-Wallis will be performed to analyze data. Conclusion: The protocol will make it possible to determine the most efficacy material for the restoration of cavities in cavities in primary molars of toddlers.

Survival estimates of atraumatic restorative treatment versus traditional restorative treatment: a systematic review with meta-analyses.

Objectives The hypothesis tested was that there is no significant difference between the survival estimates of atraumatic restorative treatment/high-viscosity glass-ionomer cement (ART/HVGIC) restorations, in posterior primary and permanent teeth, and traditional amalgam and resin composite restorations.Data sources The databases PubMed, DOAJ, LILACS, IndMed, Google Scholar and CNKI were searched.Data selection Using inclusion and exclusion criteria led to 14 eligible randomised trials. A low risk of bias was observed for two reports. Homogeneity was obtained for single-surface ART restorations after one and two years in the primary dentition.Data synthesis No statistically significant difference was found between the weighted mean survival percentages of ART/HVGIC and traditional treatments in both single- and multiple-surface restorations in primary molars and in single-surface restorations in posterior permanent teeth at years 1, 2, 3 and 5. At years 4.3 and 6.3, the difference between the two treatments was statistically significant, favouring the ART/HVGIC restorations. No statistically significant difference was found between the weighted mean survival percentages of ART/HVGIC and traditional treatments in multiple-surface restorations in posterior permanent teeth.Conclusion The ART method using HVGICs can be considered as a replacement for traditional restorations in single- and multiple-surface cavities in primary molars, and in single-surface cavities in posterior permanent teeth, particularly for amalgam.

Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study.

AimTo compare two matrix systems (circumferential and sectional) based on clinical efficiency and patient acceptability for placement of visible light cure composite resin restorative material in a Class II cavity in primary molars.Materials and methodsThirty children with bilateral Class II cavities of age-group 5–9 years were selected. A split-mouth comparative experimental study was conducted at Manav Rachna Dental College, India. Cavities were restored using either circumferential or sectional matrix band system. The child upon completion of the treatment filled the subject preference questionnaire. Time assessment was done for matrix system placement. Contact points were evaluated using dental floss as open or closed.ResultsTime required to place sectional matrices was more (125.30 ± 29.40) than required for circumferential matrices (117.20 ± 38.94). The sectional matrices group has more ideal contacts (23) (76.7%) than the circumferential matrices group (16) (53.3%). About 70% of the children pointed discomfort toward the sectional matrices. Children in this study accepted circumferential matrices to be more comfortable than the sectional matrices group.ConclusionThe circumferential matrices group was more time efficient compared to the sectional matrices group. However, sectional matrices resulted in a greater number of restorations with ideal contacts. Based on the preference circumferential matrix band system has been found superior to sectional matrix band system.Clinical significanceThis study was conducted to find a better matrix system in case of pediatric patients. Circumferential matrices were found to be more superior with respect to preference and time efficiency and sectional matrices were preferred for ideal contacts.How to cite this articleBhatia HP, Sood S, Sharma N, et al. Comparative Evaluation of Clinical Efficiency and Patient Acceptability toward the Use of Circumferential Matrix and Sectional Matrix for Restoration of Class II Cavities in Primary Molars: An In Vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(6):748–751.

Flowable Bulk-Fill Materials Compared to Nano Ceramic Composites for Class I Cavities Restorations in Primary Molars: A Two-Year Prospective Case-Control Study.

Background: The aim of this split-mouth study is to compare the results of 24 months’ clinical performance of primary molar Class I restorations with a nano-ceramic composite, Ceram•X mono (Dentsply) with a flowable bulk-fill material regular viscosity, SDR (Dentsply). Methods: Following the ethical approval, 27 patients with at least two class I cavities in primary molars were included in the study. A total number of 54 restorations were conducted (n = 27 for Ceram X and n = 27 for SDR). Restorations were evaluated at baseline, 6, 18, and 24 months, according to the modified Ryge criteria. The cavosurface marginal discoloration and color match were evaluated visually after air-drying the tooth and after removing the plaque (if necessary). Results: At 24 months’ follow-up, 54 restorations showed similar clinical performance. The statistical analysis did not reveal any statistical significance in the values between the groups in 7 out of 7 modified Ryge criteria. However, two restorations in both groups received Bravo ratings in the cavosurface marginal discoloration scoring. No side effects were reported by the participants of the study. Conclusion: Restorations with both materials (Ceram•X mono and SDR) have provided almost identical results.

Restorative treatment of primary teeth: an evidence-based narrative review.

Various methods, with a variety of materials, exist for restoring carious primary teeth. Successful restoration of primary teeth is dependent on accurate diagnosis, knowledge of the caries process, knowledge of dental materials, and treatment choice. The purpose of this evidence-based review is to present evidence that will help clinicians to make an appropriate diagnosis, from which the optimum treatment plan can be made; to explore the literature regarding restoration of carious primary teeth; and to try and draw conclusions as to which materials and methods can be recommended. This review will primarily deal with the restoration of carious cavities in primary molars. A short discussion on restoration of primary incisors is included, with presentation of what limited evidence there is relating to this.

MICROLEAKAGE EVALUATION OF BULK-FILL COMPOSITE IN CLASS II RESTORATIONS OF PRIMARY MOLARS

INTRODUCTION: Bulk-fill composites are promising restorative materials which may minimize placement time yet provide successful, durable esthetic restoration. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate marginal microleakage of nano-hybrid bulk-fill composite, and compare it to incrementally placed conventional nano-hybrid composite when used to restore proximal cavities in primary molars. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample consisted of 44 freshly extracted sound primary molars. Standardized proximal cavity preparations were prepared and the sample was divided randomly into 2 equal groups: Group I (n=22): Teeth were restored with nano-hybrid bulk-fill composite, Group II (n=22): Teeth were restored with incrementally placed conventional nano-hybrid composite. All specimens were thermocycled and immersed in 2% methylene blue dye at 37C˚ for 24 hours. Methylene blue penetration was assessed on a 4 point grading scale (0 to 3) using a stereomicroscope to evaluate the microleakage of the restorations. Data were statistically analyzed using Mann-Whitney test and Wilcoxon Signed Ranks test. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference has been found in the microleakage scores of group I at occlusal and cervical margin (p=1.000). In group II, no statistically significant difference has been found in the microleakage scores between occlusal and cervical margins (P=0.366). Comparing the microleakage scores of group I and group II, no statistically significant difference has been found (p=0.240). Although no significant difference was detected, bulk- fill composite showed lower microleakage scores than incrementally placed conventional composite. CONCLUSIONS: Bulk-fill composite restoration marginal integrity was comparable to incrementally placed conventional composite in proximal cavities of primary molars.

In vitro evaluation of microleakage in primary teeth restored with three adhesive materials: ACTIVA™, composite resin, and resin-modified glass ionomer.

Microleakage is one of the most important problems that can adversely affect the longevity of dental restorations. The aim of this in vitro study is to assess microleakage of a new BioActive-Restorative composite (ACTIVA™, Pulpdent, USA), in comparison to standard adhesive materials used in restoring class II cavities in primary teeth. One hundred and four extracted human primary molars were randomly allocated into three groups. In each group, class II cavities were prepared and restored with one of the three restorative materials: ACTIVA, Filtek Z250, or Vitremer. Microleakage was assessed using dye penetration method under a stereomicroscope. Chi-square test was used followed by pairwise comparisons to assess the association between microleakage and the materials used. A significance level of 0.05 was assumed throughout the study. According to leakage analysis per tooth, there were no statistically significant differences in microleakage percentages between ACTIVA and both Filtek Z250 and Vitremer. Leakage analysis per surfaces showed significantly higher leakage percentages in ACTIVA compared to Filtek Z250 at both occlusal and cervical margins and lower than Vitremer at occlusal margin. ACTIVA can be a potential restorative material in class II cavities in primary molars; clinical studies are recommended.

A randomized controlled clinical trial of glass carbomer restorations in Class II cavities in primary molars: 12-month results.

To evaluate the clinical performance of Glass Carbomer (GC) (GCP Dental) in restoring Class II cavities in primary molars in comparison with resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) and composite resin (CR) restorations. Healthy children aged between 4 and 8 years with a proximal lesion in at least one primary molar were recruited from the Pediatric Dental Clinics. A sample of 162 molars was randomly assigned to one of the following restoration types: GC, RMGIC, and CR. The restorations were evaluated clinically using the Cvar and Ryge criteria at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. At 12 months, the success rates of anatomical form and marginal adaptation were 67% and 54% for GC, 98% and 93% for RMGIC, and 98% and 98% for CR, respectively. The GC restorations were significantly less successful than RMGIC and CR restorations in terms of anatomical form (P < .001) and marginal adaptation (P < .001). Secondary caries formation was not observed in any of the restorations in the three restorative material groups. The 12-month clinical performance of the GC restorative material was not satisfactory in restoring Class II cavities in primary molars. RMGIC and composite resin restorations performed significantly better. The use of GC cannot be recommended for restoring Class II cavities in primary molars.

Clinical Efficacy of Sonic Fill Composite versus Conventional Composites in Class II Cavities in Primary Molars

Conventional caries lesions management is usually based on operative procedures to re-establish the surface integrity and enable efficient dental plaque removal. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of sonic fill composite versus conventional composites in restoration class II cavities in primary molars. Twenty four patients having primary teeth indicated for restoration. Group I: Control group (12 patients) those were received conventional composite restorations for class II cavity. Group II: (12 patients) were received composite restoration (sonic fill) for class II cavity. The patients were evaluated according to FDI clinical criteria. The result revealed that the current study show better surface gloss and lower marginal staining found in sonic fill composite than conventional composite with subsequent advent of bulk fill composites, would seem to be a significant turning point in posterior direct restorative dentistry.

Long-term Effect of Supervised Toothbrushing on Levels of Plaque and Gingival Bleeding Among Schoolchildren.

To test the hypothesis that, in high caries-risk children, supervised toothbrushing (STB) reduces visible plaque levels and gingival bleeding to a greater extent than does unsupervised toothbrushing (USTB) in comparable children and in low caries-risk USTB children over 4 years. High caries-risk schoolchildren, ages 6 to 7, were allocated to three oral healthcare protocols using a cluster-randomised design: 1. Ultra-Conservative Treatment (UCT): small cavities in primary molars were restored using ART, while medium and large cavities were left open and cleaned under daily supervised toothbrushing together with the remaining dentition (UCT/STB); 2. Conventional Restorative Treatment (CRT): primary molars were restored with amalgam, while high caries-risk first permanent molars received resin sealants (CRT/USTB); 3. Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART): primary molars were restored using ART, while high caries-risk first permanent molars received ART sealants (ART/USTB). Low caries-risk children (dmft ≤ 1) formed the no-treatment/USTB group. 273 children were examined at baseline (T0) and after 4 years (T1) according to the VPI and GBI indices. Data were analysed using linear and logistic regression. Mean VPI and mean GBI scores were statistically significantly lower at T1 than at T0. Reduction in mean VPI scores in UCT/STB children was statistically significantly higher than for CRT+ART/USTB children over 4 years (p = 0.03), but no difference was observed between UCT/STB and no-treatment/USTB children (p = 0.361). No statistically significant difference in the reduction of mean GBI scores was observed between UCT/STB and CRT+ART/USTB (p = 0.62) and no-treatment/USTB children (p = 0.74). In high caries-risk children, the protocol based on supervised toothbrushing presented greater reduction in visible plaque levels than did protocols based on restorations and sealants over 4 years.

Comparative evaluation of microleakage between bulk esthetic materials versus resin-modified glass ionomer to restore Class II cavities in primary molars

The aim of the study was to assess the microleakage of one high-viscosity conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) and a bulk-fill composite resin, in comparison to a resin-modified GIC in Class II restorations in primary molars. Standardized Class II slot cavity preparations were prepared in exfoliating primary molars. Teeth were restored using one of the three materials tested (n = 10): SonicFill bulk-fill composite resin (SF), EQUIA Fil conventional reinforced GIC (EQF), and Vitremer resin-reinforced GIC (VT). The restorations were then subjected to thermocycling procedure (×2000 5°C-55°C 10 s/min) and soaked in 1% neutralized fuchsin solution (pH: 7.4) for 24 h at 37°C. Teeth were sectioned longitudinally in a mesiodistal direction under continuous cooling into three slabs of 1 mm thickness and studied under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Data were evaluated by one-way analysis of variance and the Tukey's multiple comparison test employing 95% (α = 0.05). EQF and SF showed significantly lower microleakage scores and percentage of dye penetration (%RL) when compared to VT resin-reinforced GIC (P < 0.001). SF and EQF produced the minimum microleakage when compared to VT in Class II restorations on primary molars. Fewer application procedures and reduction in treatment time in SF and EQF systems proved advantageous in pediatric dentistry.

Evaluation of cavity wall adaptation of bulk esthetic materials to restore class II cavities in primary molars.

The purpose of the study was to assess the cavity wall adaptation and gap formation of a bulk fill composite resin and reinforced conventional glass ionomer cement and a resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class II restorations on primary molars. Standardized class II slot cavity preparations were prepared in exfoliating primary molars. Teeth were restored with one of the three tested materials (n=10): SonicFill bulk fill composite resin (SF), EQUIA Fil conventional reinforced glass ionomer cement (EQF), and Vitremer resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement (VT). Cavity wall adaptation of the restorations was investigated by computerized X-ray micro-tomography and the percentage void volume fraction (%VVF) was calculated. Same specimens were sectioned and the interfaces were evaluated by reflection optical microscopy to measure the percentage linear length (%LD) of the interfacial gaps. Samples were further evaluated by environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM). EQF and SF showed significantly lower %VVF and %LD values than VT (p<0.05). This was in accordance with ESEM findings where VT illustrated extended interfacial gaps. SF and EQF showed better cavity wall adaptation than VT in class II restorations on primary molars. High-strength conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC EQF) and bulk fill composite SF requiring fewer application steps and reduced operating time than the traditional composite resin materials showed good cavity wall adaptation. Short operating time and good cavity wall adaptation are advantages of the materials in restorative and pediatric dentistry, especially while working on children with limited attention span.