Microleakage Evaluation of a Hydroxyapatite Base in Comparison with a Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement in Vitro

Banava , Sepideh; Poorbaghi , Parisa; Nemati Anaraki , Saeid; Aghajani , Farzaneh; Noohi , Soheil; Kharrazifard , Mohammad javad; Inanloo , Hosain

[Home ] [Archive]

Main Menu

Journal Information

Editorial Policies

Articles archive

For Authors

Contact us

Site Facilities

Search in website

Receive site information

Last site contents
:: Contact Us

Volume 24, Issue 4 (10-2012)

J Iran Dent Assoc 2012, 24(4): 152-158

Back to browse issues page

Microleakage Evaluation of a Hydroxyapatite Base in Comparison with a Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement in Vitro

Sepideh Banava ^*

¹, Parisa Poorbaghi²

, Saeid Nemati Anaraki³

, Farzaneh Aghajani⁴

, Soheil Noohi²

, Mohammad javad Kharrazifard⁵

, Hosain Inanloo⁶

1- Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Azad University. Tehran, Iran , sbanava@yahoo.com
2- Dentist
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Islamic Azad University. Tehran, Iran
4- Member of Dental Materials Reference Lab, School of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Tehran, Iran
5- Dentist, Epidemiologist, Member of Research Center of Dental Faculty, Tehran University of Medical Sciences. Tehran, Iran
6- Postgraduate Student, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Azad University. Tehran, Iran

Abstract: (12277 Views)

Background and Aim : Many attempts have been done to improvethe quality,properties and composition of dental materials to decrease the microleakage and its consequences.The objective of this invitro study was to compare microleakage of light cure resin modified glass ionomer cement and a hydroxyapatite containing base .

Materials and Methods : In this experimental study 40 intact human premolars were divided into 4 groups. On the buccal surface of each tooth, around cavity was prepared with 3 mm in diameter and at least 1 mmdeep into dentin.Teeth were restored using L.C resin modified glass ionomer lining cement,L.C resin modified glass ionomer restorative cement, Lime-Lite with bonding agent, and Lime – Lite without bonding agent.After thermocycling the specimens were immersed in AgNO3 solution for 2 hours.After sectioning the specimens, dye leakage wad evaluated by a stereomicroscope. Microleakage was graded according to ISO 11 405 in occlusal and gingival cavity margins. Obtaineddata were statisticallyanalysed by Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests .

Results : Most of the samples in group 3 (lime – lite with bonding agent) demonstrated zeromicroleakage grades in gingival and occlusal cavity margins and in group 4 (Lime – Lite – without bonding agant) the majority of samples showedgrade 3 microleakagein both margins. These findings is both margins were significantly higher than those of other groups (p< 0.05), but there were not significant differences among glass ionomer groups in marginal microleakage (p> 0.05 ).

Conclusion : Hydroxyapatite containing base showed more microleakage compared with glass ionomer cement, but application of a bonding agent prior to its placement was effective in reducing its microleakage .

Keywords: Microleakage, Glass Ionomer, Hydroxyapatite cement

Full-Text [PDF 170 kb] (2538 Downloads)

Type of Study: Original | Subject: Restorative Dentistry

References

1. Mali P, Deshpande S, Singh A. Microleakage of restorative materials: An invitro study. J In-dian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2006 Jan;24(1):15-18.

2. Craig RG, Powers JM. Restorative dental ma-terials. 11th ed. USA: Mosby; 2006, Chapter 20.

3. Roberson TM, Heymann H, Swift EJ. Sturdevant's art & science of operativedentistry. 5th ed. USA: Mosby; 2006,140,174-182,196-205,310-312.

4. Summit JB, Robbinson W, Schwartz R. Oper-ative dentistry. 2nd ed. China: Quintessence; 2006, 94, 96,103,219-224.

5. Pulpdent Corporation. Lime-lite light cure cavity liner. 2012. Available: http://www. pulpdent. com /June 5. 2012.

6. Banava S, ZinSaaz Boroojerdi S. Comparison of the effect of Prompt L-Pop and Single bond on compressive strength of calcium hydroxide and lime-lite. [Thesis]. Tehran: Tehran Islamic Azad Dental Faculty; 2008, (Persian).

7. Banava S, Homaei Z. Effect of some adhe-sives on shear bond strength of Lime-Lite to composite resin. [Thesis]. Tehran: Tehran Islamic Azad Dental Faculty; 2008. (Persian).

8. Magni E, Zhang L, Hickel R, Bossu M, Poli-meni A, Ferrari M. SEM and microleakage eval-uation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations whit or whitout the use of a light curable coating material and of polishing: An in vitro study. J Dent. 2008 Nov;36(11):885-891.

9. Gerdolle DA, Mortier E, Droz D. Microleak-age and polymerization shrinkage of various polymer restorative materials. J Dent Child (Chick) 2008 May-Aug; 75(2):125-33.

10. Delme K IM, Deman PJ, De Bruyne M AA, De Moor R JG. Microleakage of four different restorative glass ionomer formulations in class V cavities: Er: YAG laser versus conventional preparation. PhotoMed Laser Surg. 2008 Dec; 26(6):541-9.

11. Nemati S, Karkehabadi H. Comparison of microleakage of three adhesives; Clearfil SE Bond, Adhese, Prompt L-pop in class five com-posite restorations. [Thesis]. Tehran: Tehran Islamic Azad Dental Faculty; 2009, (Persian).

12. Nemati S, Hadjighasemi Y. Evaluation of different light curing method on microleakage of class five composite restorations. [Thesis]. Tehran: Tehran Islamic Azad Dental Faculty; 2008, (Persian).

13. Chuang S, Jin Y, Tsai P, Wong T. Effect of various surface protections on the margin mi-croleakage of resin modified glass ionomer ce-ments: An invitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2001 Sep; 86 (3):309-14.

14. Mount GJ. An Atlas of glass-ionomer ce-ments, A clinicians Guide, 3rded. United King-dom: Martin Dunitz; 2012, 1-56, 95-133.

15. Mount GJ. An Atlas of Glass-Ionomer Ce-ment’s, A clinicians Guide. 3rded. UK: Martin Dunitz; 2002, Chapter 1,2,5,6.

16. Banava S, Fazlyab M, Heshmat H, Mo-jtahedzadeh F, Mottahari P. Comparison of pulp response to four different pulp capping meth-ods. [Thesis]. Tehran: Tehran Islamic Azad Dent Faculty; 2010, (Persian).

17. Ajami B, Makarem A, Niknejad E. Microleakage of ClV compomer and light-cured glass ionomer restorations in young premolar teeth: An invitro study. J Mashhad Dent Sch, Mashhad Univ Med Sci, 2007; 31(Special Issue):25-28.

18. Ashvin R, Arashti R. Comprative evaluation for microleakage betweenFuji-vII glass ionomer cement and unfilled resin: A combind invivo invitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2007 Apr-Jun;25(2):86-7.

19. Svizero Nda R, D'Alpino PH, da Silva a Souza MH, de Carvalho RM. Liner and light exposure: Effect on Invitro ClV microleakage. Oper Dent. 2005 March; 30(3):325-30.

20. Svizero NR. Liner and light exposure: Effect on Invitro class 5 microleakage. Oper Dent. 2005 May -Jun; 30(3):325-30.

Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article

Mendeley

Zotero

RefWorks

Banava S, Poorbaghi P, Nemati Anaraki S, Aghajani F, Noohi S, Kharrazifard M J et al . Microleakage Evaluation of a Hydroxyapatite Base in Comparison with a Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement in Vitro. J Iran Dent Assoc 2012; 24 (4) :152-158
URL: http://jida.ir/article-1-1276-en.html

Rights and permissions
	This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Volume 24, Issue 4 (10-2012)

Back to browse issues page

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly

Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645