Microleakage of composite and two types of glass lonomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps

Sarah N. Farmer, Scott W. Ludlow, Martin Donaldson, Daranee Versluis, Antheunis Versluis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: This study's purpose was to evaluate microleakage of two types of glass lonomer (Gl) and composite restorations with saliva contamination at different stages of restorative procedures. Methods: Extracted teeth with Class V cavities were restored with a conventional Gl, nanofilled RMGI, or total-etched composite. The preparations were contaminated with saliva before the adhesive/primer application or before the restoration placement (n=10). The restored teeth were thermocycled (1000X), stained (basic fuchsia), and sectioned. Microleakage distance was measured and subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's post-hoc test (P=.05). Results: For the enamel margin, no significant difference was found between the conventional Gl and composite restoration, with or without saliva contamination (P<.05). The nanofilled RMGI with contamination before restoration had the highest microleakage. For the cementum margin, composite had significantly more microleakage than both types of Gl restorations, regardless of saliva contamination. Conclusions: Conventional and resin-modified glass lonomer restorations had less cementum microleakage, while the composite had less enamel microleakage. Saliva contamination did not affect microleakage of the conventional Gl at either enamel or cementum margins. The nanofilled RMGI system was not sensitive to saliva contamination at the gingival margin, but had increased microleakage at the enamel margin, especially after the primer application.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)14-17
Number of pages4
JournalPediatric Dentistry
Volume36
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014

Fingerprint

Saliva
Glass
Dental Enamel
Dental Cementum
Tooth
Adhesives
Analysis of Variance

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Dentistry(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Microleakage of composite and two types of glass lonomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps. / Farmer, Sarah N.; Ludlow, Scott W.; Donaldson, Martin; Versluis, Daranee; Versluis, Antheunis.

In: Pediatric Dentistry, Vol. 36, No. 1, 01.01.2014, p. 14-17.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{07a82be27d064eaaacda3a864346bfc2,
title = "Microleakage of composite and two types of glass lonomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps",
abstract = "Purpose: This study's purpose was to evaluate microleakage of two types of glass lonomer (Gl) and composite restorations with saliva contamination at different stages of restorative procedures. Methods: Extracted teeth with Class V cavities were restored with a conventional Gl, nanofilled RMGI, or total-etched composite. The preparations were contaminated with saliva before the adhesive/primer application or before the restoration placement (n=10). The restored teeth were thermocycled (1000X), stained (basic fuchsia), and sectioned. Microleakage distance was measured and subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's post-hoc test (P=.05). Results: For the enamel margin, no significant difference was found between the conventional Gl and composite restoration, with or without saliva contamination (P<.05). The nanofilled RMGI with contamination before restoration had the highest microleakage. For the cementum margin, composite had significantly more microleakage than both types of Gl restorations, regardless of saliva contamination. Conclusions: Conventional and resin-modified glass lonomer restorations had less cementum microleakage, while the composite had less enamel microleakage. Saliva contamination did not affect microleakage of the conventional Gl at either enamel or cementum margins. The nanofilled RMGI system was not sensitive to saliva contamination at the gingival margin, but had increased microleakage at the enamel margin, especially after the primer application.",
author = "Farmer, {Sarah N.} and Ludlow, {Scott W.} and Martin Donaldson and Daranee Versluis and Antheunis Versluis",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "36",
pages = "14--17",
journal = "Pediatric Dentistry",
issn = "0164-1263",
publisher = "American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Microleakage of composite and two types of glass lonomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps

AU - Farmer, Sarah N.

AU - Ludlow, Scott W.

AU - Donaldson, Martin

AU - Versluis, Daranee

AU - Versluis, Antheunis

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Purpose: This study's purpose was to evaluate microleakage of two types of glass lonomer (Gl) and composite restorations with saliva contamination at different stages of restorative procedures. Methods: Extracted teeth with Class V cavities were restored with a conventional Gl, nanofilled RMGI, or total-etched composite. The preparations were contaminated with saliva before the adhesive/primer application or before the restoration placement (n=10). The restored teeth were thermocycled (1000X), stained (basic fuchsia), and sectioned. Microleakage distance was measured and subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's post-hoc test (P=.05). Results: For the enamel margin, no significant difference was found between the conventional Gl and composite restoration, with or without saliva contamination (P<.05). The nanofilled RMGI with contamination before restoration had the highest microleakage. For the cementum margin, composite had significantly more microleakage than both types of Gl restorations, regardless of saliva contamination. Conclusions: Conventional and resin-modified glass lonomer restorations had less cementum microleakage, while the composite had less enamel microleakage. Saliva contamination did not affect microleakage of the conventional Gl at either enamel or cementum margins. The nanofilled RMGI system was not sensitive to saliva contamination at the gingival margin, but had increased microleakage at the enamel margin, especially after the primer application.

AB - Purpose: This study's purpose was to evaluate microleakage of two types of glass lonomer (Gl) and composite restorations with saliva contamination at different stages of restorative procedures. Methods: Extracted teeth with Class V cavities were restored with a conventional Gl, nanofilled RMGI, or total-etched composite. The preparations were contaminated with saliva before the adhesive/primer application or before the restoration placement (n=10). The restored teeth were thermocycled (1000X), stained (basic fuchsia), and sectioned. Microleakage distance was measured and subjected to analysis of variance and Duncan's post-hoc test (P=.05). Results: For the enamel margin, no significant difference was found between the conventional Gl and composite restoration, with or without saliva contamination (P<.05). The nanofilled RMGI with contamination before restoration had the highest microleakage. For the cementum margin, composite had significantly more microleakage than both types of Gl restorations, regardless of saliva contamination. Conclusions: Conventional and resin-modified glass lonomer restorations had less cementum microleakage, while the composite had less enamel microleakage. Saliva contamination did not affect microleakage of the conventional Gl at either enamel or cementum margins. The nanofilled RMGI system was not sensitive to saliva contamination at the gingival margin, but had increased microleakage at the enamel margin, especially after the primer application.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905847078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84905847078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 36

SP - 14

EP - 17

JO - Pediatric Dentistry

JF - Pediatric Dentistry

SN - 0164-1263

IS - 1

ER -