Penetration of radiocalcium at the margins of resin and glass ionomer dentine bonding agents in primary and permanent teeth


Tulunoglu O., Tulunoglu I., Ulusu T., Genc Y.

JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY, sa.7, ss.481-486, 2000 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Basım Tarihi: 2000
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/s0300-5712(00)00029-4
  • Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF DENTISTRY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.481-486
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: microleakage, dentine bonding agents, radioisotope detection, COMPOSITE RESTORATIONS, MICROLEAKAGE, ADHESIVES, STRENGTH, LEAKAGE
  • Ankara Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the leakage of three resin dentine bonding agents (Prime and Bond, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, Probond) and a glass ionomer dentine bonding agent (GC Fujibond LC), in cervical cavities prepared in primary and permanent molar teeth restored with a hybrid composite resin (Tetric). Methods: Cervical cavities without a bevel at the cave-surface margins were prepared in the buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted primary and permanent molar teeth. After being restored, the teeth were stored for 1 week in a saline solution at 37 degrees C and then thermally cycled between 5 and 55 degrees C. Marginal leakage was determined subsequently using a radioactive isotope containing Ca-45 and an autoradiographic technique. Results: The results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in microleakage of the bond between permanent and primary teeth dentine and Fuji Bond LC and Probond dentine bonding agents. The difference between permanent and primary teeth groups for gingival values of the Prime and Bond 2.1 group U = 22.5, p = 0.0355 and the Scotchbond Multipurpose group U = 24.0, p = 0.0406 were statistically significant. There were no significant differences between the occlusal and gingival microleakage values in either primary or permanent teeth with Prime and Bond 2.1, Fuji Bond LC and Probond except the difference at Scotchbond Multipurpose in primary teeth. For primary teeth gingival margins, none of the bonding systems were significantly different from the control group. Conclusions: These results indicate that although no statistically significant differences were found between test and control group values, the use of Fuji II LC in cervical cavities with cementum margins in primary teeth would provide the best resistance to microleakage among the test materials while the use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose would provide the best resistance to microleakage in cervical cavities with cementum margins in permanent teeth. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.