Analysis of Marginal Adaptation and Sealing to Enamel and Dentin of Four Different One-step Self- etch Adhesives in Class II Resin Composite Restorations

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
pp. 26-31
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

scholarly journals Clinical Effect of Dental Adhesive on Marginal Integrity in Class I And Class II Resin-Composite Restorations

Folia Medica ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 250-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neshka A. Manchorova-Veleva ◽  
Stoyan B. Vladimirov ◽  
Donka А. Keskinova
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Recall Time ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
One Step ◽  
Mechanical Factors ◽  
The One ◽  
Self Etch

Abstract BACKGROUND: Dental adhesives are believed to influence marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration when used under posterior resin-based composite restorations. Studies on the latest adhesive systems reveal that the group of the three-step etch-and-rinse adhesive (3-E&RA) and the one-step self-etch adhesive (1-SEA) have entirely different bonding mechanisms, as well as different bond strength and resistance to chemical, thermal and mechanical factors. STUDY OBJECTIVES: A hypothesis that a 1-SEA would result in greater enamel marginal discoloration and poorer marginal adaptation than a 3-E&RA was tested. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred restorations were placed with a 1-SEA and 100 restorations with a 3-E&RA. Teeth were restored with Filtek Supreme nanofilled resin-composite and were evaluated for marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration at baseline, and 6 months, 12 months, and 36 months postoperatively. RESULTS: The statistical analysis revealed significant differences in marginal integrity between test groups. The 1-SEA resulted in greater enamel marginal discoloration and poorer marginal adaptation than the 3-E&RA at any recall time. CONCLUSIONS: Marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration depend on the type of dentin adhesive used. The restorations with Filtek Supreme and Scotchbond MP are better than the restorations with Adper Prompt L-Pop with regard to the marginal adaptation and marginal discoloration at 6-, 12- and 36-month evaluations.

scholarly journals Marginal Integrity of Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Class II Composite Restorations

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Al-Harbi ◽  
D Kaisarly ◽  
D Bader ◽  
M El Gezawi
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Sandwich Technique ◽  
Thermomechanical Cycling ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Marginal Integrity ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Maxillary Premolars ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Bulk-fill composites have been introduced to facilitate the placement of deep direct resin composite restorations. This study aimed at analyzing the cervical marginal integrity of bulk-fill vs incremental and open-sandwich class II resin composite restorations after thermomechanical cycling using replica scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and ranking according to the World Dental Federation (FDI) criteria. Box-only class II cavities were prepared in 91 maxillary premolars with the gingival margin placed 1 mm above and below the cemento-enamel junction. Eighty-four premolars were divided into self-etch and total-etch groups, then subdivided into six restorative subgroups (n=7): 1-Tetric Ceram HB (TC) was used incrementally and in the open-sandwich technique with 2-Tetric EvoFlow (EF) and 3-Smart Dentin Replacement (SD). Bulk-fill restoratives were 4-SonicFill (SF), 5-Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (TN), and 6-Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TE). In subgroups 1-5, Tetric N-Bond self-etch and Tetric N-Bond total-etch adhesives were used, whereas in subgroup 6, AdheSE self-etch and ExciTE F total etch were used. One more group (n=7) was restored with Filtek P90 Low Shrink Posterior Restorative (P9) only in combination with its self-etch P90 System Adhesive. Materials were manipulated and light cured (20 seconds, 1600 mW/cm2), and restorations were artificially aged by thermo-occlusal load cycling. Polyvinyl-siloxane impressions were taken and poured with epoxy resin. Resin replicas were examined by SEM (200×) for marginal sealing, and percentages of perfect margins were analyzed. Moreover, samples were examined using loupes (3.5×) and explorers and categorized according to the FDI criteria. Results were statistically analyzed (SEM by Kruskal-Wallis test and FDI by chi-square test) without significant differences in either the replica SEM groups (p=0.848) or the FDI criteria groups (p>0.05). The best SEM results at the enamel margin were in TC+EF/total-etch and SF/total-etch and at the cementum margins were in SF/total-etch and TE/self-etch, while the worst were in TC/self-etch at both margins. According to FDI criteria, the best was TE/total-etch at the enamel margin, and the poorest was P9/self-etch at the cementum margin. Groups did not differ significantly, and there was a strong correlation in results between replica SEM and FDI ranking.

scholarly journals Impact of Different Etching Strategies on Margin Integrity of Conservative Composite Restorations in Demineralized Enamel

Materials ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 4500
Author(s):  
Mohamed El Gedaily ◽  
Thomas Attin ◽  
Daniel B. Wiedemeier ◽  
Tobias T. Tauböck
Keyword(s):  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Carious Lesions ◽  
Demineralized Enamel ◽  
Bonded Composite ◽  
One Step ◽  
Self Etch

Good margin integrity with a tight seal of the adhesive interface is considered one of the key factors for the clinical success of composite restorations. This study investigated the effect of enamel etching with phosphoric acid on the margin integrity of self-etch bonded composite restorations in demineralized enamel. Crowns of bovine incisors were assigned into 14 groups (n = 10 per group) of which ten groups (groups 1–5 and 8–12) were demineralized (21 days, acid buffer, pH 4.95) to create artificial carious lesions. Standardized Class V cavities were prepared in all specimens. Demineralized groups were either etched with phosphoric acid for 10, 30, 60, or 120 s (groups 2–5 and 9–12), or no etching was performed (groups 1 and 8). The non-demineralized (sound) groups were etched for 10 s (groups 7 and 14) or remained non-etched (groups 6 and 13). Resin composite restorations were then placed using either a one-step (iBond Self Etch, groups 1–7) or two-step self-etch adhesive (Clearfil SE Bond, groups 8–14). Margin integrity of the restorations was assessed after thermocycling (5000×, 5–55 °C) using scanning electron microscopy, and the percentage of continuous margins (%CM) was statistically analyzed (α = 0.05). Phosphoric acid etching significantly increased %CM in both demineralized and sound enamel. For iBond Self Etch, a significant increase in %CM in demineralized enamel was observed with increased etching times. All etched groups treated with Clearfil SE Bond and those etched for 60 or 120 s and treated with iBond Self Etch showed similar %CM in demineralized enamel as in etched sound enamel, and significantly higher %CM than in non-etched sound enamel. In conclusion, enamel etching with phosphoric acid improves margin integrity of composite restorations in demineralized enamel when bonded with the examined adhesives.

The Effects of Dentin Adhesives and Liner Materials on the Microleakage of Class II Resin Composite Restorations in Primary and Permanent Teeth

2014 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
H C Güngör ◽  
E Canoğlu ◽  
Z C Çehreli
Keyword(s):  
Primary Teeth ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Permanent Teeth ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Liner Material ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Dentin Adhesives ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Self Etch

>Purpose: To compare the occlusal and gingival microleakage of Class-II composite restorations utilizing etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives and different liner materials in primary and permanent teeth. Study design: Standardized class-II cavities were prepared in freshly-extracted sound primary and permanent molars (n=80/each), with all cavosurface margins involving enamel. The main experimental groups were; A. Single Bond 2/primary teeth; B. Adper SE Plus/primary teeth; C. Single Bond 2/permanent teeth; and D. Adper SE Plus/permanent teeth. Each group comprised 4 subgroups (n=10/each) with respect to the liner material employed (n=10/subgroup): 1. Fuji VII; 2. Fuji Triage; 3. Filtek Supreme XT Flowable Composite, and 4. No liner. All teeth were restored with Filtek Supreme XT Universal Nanofilled Composite. Following thermocycling and immersion in basic fuchsin, the extent of microleakage was measured on crown sections using image analysis. The data were analyzed with Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test, Mann-Whitney U-Test and Kruskal-Wallis One-Way ANOVA at ?=0.05. Results: In both primary and permanent teeth the use of etch-and-rinse adhesive resulted in similar occlusal and gingival microleakage values (p>0.05). As for the self-etch adhesive, similar results were observed (p>0.05) with the exception of significantly less occlusal leakage in the Fuji Triage VII and Fuji Triage subgroups of primary teeth than those of permanent teeth (pÃ0.05). When the effects of liner material and the type of adhesive were disregarded, significantly more gingival microleakage was observed in primary teeth than in permanent teeth (pÃ0.01), while the occlusal microleakage values were similar (p>0.05). Irrespective of the tooth type and adhesive material, comparison of subgroups containing a liner material with those without one revealed no significant differences for both occlusal and gingival microleakage values (p>0.05). Conclusions: Occlusal microleakage was similar in both primary and permanent teeth, while a lesser extent of gingival seal was observed in primary teeth. Overall, placement of a liner material did not improve resistance to microleakage.

Influence of Beveling and Ultrasound Application on Marginal Adaptation of Box-only Class II (slot) Resin Composite Restorations

10.2341/06-84 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. R. Schmidlin ◽  
K. Wolleb ◽  
T. Imfeld ◽  
M. Gygax ◽  
A. Lussi
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Relevance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Ultrasound Application

Clinical Relevance Beveling box-only Class II cavities is necessary to improve the marginal quality of restorations. Where beveling is impossible or difficult to achieve, ultrasound may improve marginal quality.

Cervical Margin Integrity of Class II Resin Composite Restorations in Laser- and Bur-Prepared Cavities Using Three Different Adhesive Systems

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 316-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
PA Oskoee ◽  
S Kimyai ◽  
ME Ebrahimi ◽  
S Rikhtegaran ◽  
F Pournaghi-Azar
Keyword(s):  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Single Bond ◽  
Gap Formation ◽  
Adhesive Systems ◽  
Tooth Structure ◽  
Composite Restorations ◽  
Etch And Rinse ◽  
Gap Width

SUMMARY One of the challenges in durability of posterior tooth-colored restorative materials is polymerization shrinkage, which results in gap formation between the restoration and tooth structure. The aim of the present study was to investigate marginal adaptation of Class II composite restorations using a self-etching and two etch-and-rinse adhesive systems in cavities prepared either with bur or Er,Cr:YSGG laser. A total of 45 extracted sound human premolars were selected. In each tooth, mesial and distal Class II cavities were prepared either by a diamond bur or by Er,Cr:YSGG laser with the margins 1 mm apical to the cemento-enamel junction. Then the teeth were randomly divided into three groups of 15 each, according to the type of the adhesive system used (Single Bond, Single Bond 2, and Adper Easy One adhesive systems). Subsequent to restoring the teeth, the specimens were subjected to thermal cycling between 5 ± 2°C and 55 ± 2°C for 500 cycles and were then cut longitudinally into two halves using a diamond disk. Marginal adaptation was evaluated using a stereomicroscope, and the values for gap widths were obtained in micrometers. Data were analyzed using two-factor analysis of variance and post hoc tests. There were statistically significant differences in mean marginal gap widths between the adhesive type and preparation groups (p<0.05). The interfacial gap width in bur-prepared cavities was significantly less than that in laser-prepared cavities, and the lowest gap width was observed in Adper Easy One regardless of the type of the preparation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document