610 the journal of prosthetic dentistry volume 81 number 5
Download 62.61 Kb. Pdf ko'rish
|
Microleakage of Class V resin modified g
TOLEDANO ET AL
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY MAY 1999 611 Teeth were prepared for microleakage evaluation by coating the entire tooth with 1 application of nail var- nish, except for 1 mm around the restoration margins. These specimens were then subjected to 1000 temper- ature cycles as suggested in a previous study. 27 Each cycle consisted of 30 seconds at 6°C and 30 seconds at 60°C. After thermocycling, teeth were placed in a solu- tion of 2% basic fuchsin dye (Fisher Scientific, Fair Lawn, N.J.) for 24 hours at room temperature. After removal of the specimens from the dye solu- tion, the superficial dye was removed with a pumice slurry and rubber cup. Teeth were then mounted in a light-curing 1-component methacrylate-based resin (Technovit 7200 VLC, Kulzer, Norderstedt, Germany) to facilitate handling during sectioning. The resin was cured for 24 hours (Histolux, EXAKT, Norderstedt, Germany), then teeth were sectioned longitudinally with a hard tissue microtome (Exakt-apparerteban, Otto Herrman, Norderstedt, Germany) in 0.6-mm thick sections to evaluate the dye penetration. 28 The sections were then separated, and the cut surfaces cor- responding to the most mesial, central (mesial and dis- tal), and most distal portion of the tooth restoration interface were examined at the occlusal and gingival margins with a stereomicroscope (Olympus Co, Tokyo, Japan) at × 16 magnification. Examination of the speci- mens was undertaken at random, and the investigators were unaware of the exact nature of the restorative material. Staining along the tooth restoration interface was recorded by 2 evaluators, according to the following criteria: 0 = no dye penetration; 1 = partial dye pene- tration; 2 = dye penetration along the occlusal or gingival wall, but not including the axial wall; and 3 = dye penetration to and along the axial wall. If disagree- ment occurred between the evaluators, a consensus was obtained after reexamination of the specimen by both investigators. Occlusal, gingival, and overall scores for each group of restoration were compared with the Kruskal-Wallis 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) nonparametric statistical test to identify any statistical significant differences between the materials, and the Wilcoxon test was performed to compare each matched pair of restorative materials. Significance was consid- ered at the .05 level. RESULTS Microleakage scores for the occlusal, gingival, and overall walls are presented in Table I. Kruskal-Wallis 1-way ANOVA indicated significant differences between the restorative materials for overall, occlusal, and gingival scores (P=.03; P=.01; P=.01, respectively). Further matched analysis by Wilcoxon test was under- taken to compare occlusal, gingival, and overall scores of each material, which revealed statistically significant differences between Fuji II LC glass ionomer cement and Dyract resin composite, both for the occlusal (P=.005) and gingival (P=.005) margins and also as an overall evaluation (P=.01) (combining the occlusal and gingival margins scores) with Fuji II LC demonstrating the least dye penetration between these 2 products. Vitremer glass ionomer cement revealed dye penetra- tion scores between Fuji II LC glass ionomer cement and Dyract resin composite, with no statistically signif- icant differences between Vitremer glass ionomer cement and the other 2 products. Download 62.61 Kb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling