Marginal quality of a full-body bulk-fill composite placed with an universal adhesive system in etch-and-rinse and self-etch mode: An
Journal
Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry
ISSN: 1989-5488
Titre abrégé: J Clin Exp Dent
Pays: Spain
ID NLM: 101603132
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
26
11
2020
accepted:
15
03
2021
entrez:
13
9
2021
pubmed:
14
9
2021
medline:
14
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Marginal seal of a nanohybrid bulk-fill composite compared to a nanohybrid conventional composite, using a universal adhesive (UA) applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) mode was investigated. Thirty-six intact molars were selected and two standardized cavities in each tooth were prepared and allocated into four groups according to restorative material and etching strategy. All samples were placed in a 1% methylene blue solution for 24 h, then cut in the middle of the restorations obtaining two parts (n=144) and used for microscopic evaluation (50x) for dye penetration measurements. The data were analysed by ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc test ( Simplified restorations with nanohybrid bulk-fill composite showed comparable marginal leakage to incrementally placed nanohybrid composite. The UA used with a ER technique resulted in better marginal seal irrespective of the restorative material used.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Marginal seal of a nanohybrid bulk-fill composite compared to a nanohybrid conventional composite, using a universal adhesive (UA) applied in etch-and-rinse (ER) and self-etch (SE) mode was investigated.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
METHODS
Thirty-six intact molars were selected and two standardized cavities in each tooth were prepared and allocated into four groups according to restorative material and etching strategy. All samples were placed in a 1% methylene blue solution for 24 h, then cut in the middle of the restorations obtaining two parts (n=144) and used for microscopic evaluation (50x) for dye penetration measurements.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The data were analysed by ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc test (
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Simplified restorations with nanohybrid bulk-fill composite showed comparable marginal leakage to incrementally placed nanohybrid composite. The UA used with a ER technique resulted in better marginal seal irrespective of the restorative material used.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34512924
doi: 10.4317/jced.58081
pii: 58081
pmc: PMC8412802
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e835-e844Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2021 Medicina Oral S.L.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of interest All authors of this manuscript certify that they have no proprietary, financial, or other personal interest of any nature or kind in any product, service, and/or company that is presented in this article.
Références
J Dent. 1997 Nov;25(6):435-40
pubmed: 9604575
J Adhes Dent. 2014 Apr;16(2):193-4
pubmed: 24757706
Am J Dent. 2013 Oct;26(5):271-7
pubmed: 24479279
J Dent. 2012 Jun;40(6):475-84
pubmed: 22381614
Biomaterials. 1997 Feb;18(4):337-41
pubmed: 9068896
J Dent. 2012 Jun;40(6):500-5
pubmed: 22390980
Oper Dent. 2004 Jul-Aug;29(4):462-9
pubmed: 15279488
Dent Mater. 2014 Oct;30(10):1104-12
pubmed: 25086481
Oper Dent. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):481-490
pubmed: 26794190
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2019 Aug;107(6):2121-2131
pubmed: 30637932
Dent Mater. 2007 Aug;23(8):1011-7
pubmed: 17097138
Odontology. 2019 Jul;107(3):374-382
pubmed: 30569286
Oper Dent. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):520-530
pubmed: 27351078
Dent Mater. 2001 Jul;17(4):296-308
pubmed: 11356206
Dent Mater. 1991 Apr;7(2):107-13
pubmed: 1936638
J Dent. 2014 Apr;42(4):439-49
pubmed: 24480086
J Adhes Dent. 2017;19(4):287-294
pubmed: 28849796
J Dent. 1997 May-Jul;25(3-4):321-30
pubmed: 9175364
Oper Dent. 2013 Sep-Oct;38(5):E166-81
pubmed: 23738673
Dent Mater. 2014 Sep;30(9):e245-51
pubmed: 24958689
Dent Mater. 2011 Jan;27(1):17-28
pubmed: 21109301
J Appl Oral Sci. 2010 Jul-Aug;18(4):421-5
pubmed: 20835580
ScientificWorldJournal. 2015;2015:701262
pubmed: 25874254
J Dent. 2003 Aug;31(6):437-44
pubmed: 12878027
Dent Mater. 2005 Apr;21(4):324-35
pubmed: 15766579
Oper Dent. 2015 Jul-Aug;40(4):440-8
pubmed: 25602350
J Dent. 2014 May;42(5):603-12
pubmed: 24373855
J Dent. 2013 Aug;41(8):695-702
pubmed: 23707645
Eur J Dent. 2014 Jan;8(1):1-8
pubmed: 24966739
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018 Jul;30(4):287-298
pubmed: 29573132
Oper Dent. 2015 Jul-Aug;40(4):410-7
pubmed: 25575201
J Adhes Dent. 2015 Apr;17(2):147-54
pubmed: 25893223
Oper Dent. 2015 Sep-Oct;40(5):515-23
pubmed: 25741908
J Dent. 2014 May;42(5):595-602
pubmed: 24508503
J Dent. 2015 Jul;43(7):765-76
pubmed: 25882585
J Dent. 2011 Oct;39(10):643-7
pubmed: 21801799
J Dent. 2014 Jul;42(7):800-7
pubmed: 24814138
Oper Dent. 2014 Sep-Oct;39(5):489-99
pubmed: 24299446
Oper Dent. 2014 Jul-Aug;39(4):374-82
pubmed: 23865582
Oper Dent. 2003 May-Jun;28(3):215-35
pubmed: 12760693
Dent Mater. 2015 Sep;31(9):1150-8
pubmed: 26205382
J Dent Res. 2008 Aug;87(8):757-61
pubmed: 18650548
Dent Mater. 2005 Jan;21(1):36-42
pubmed: 15681000
Dent Mater. 2011 Jan;27(1):29-38
pubmed: 21093034
J Dent. 2015 Sep;43(9):1060-1070
pubmed: 25908573
J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2018 Jan;77:501-509
pubmed: 29040961
Dent Mater J. 2020 Jun 5;39(3):335-344
pubmed: 31932546
Oper Dent. 2015 Mar-Apr;40(2):190-200
pubmed: 25216940
Int J Esthet Dent. 2017;12(4):524-535
pubmed: 28983535
J Dent. 2003 May;31(4):231-9
pubmed: 12735916
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016 Oct 1;17(10):820-825
pubmed: 27794152
Dent Mater. 2013 Aug;29(8):e132-41
pubmed: 23790281
J Adhes Dent. 2012 Apr;14(2):103-4
pubmed: 22518387
J Dent. 2015 Sep;43(9):1083-1092
pubmed: 26159382
Dent Mater. 2015 Dec;31(12):1542-51
pubmed: 26608118
J Dent. 2014 May;42(5):575-81
pubmed: 24561041
Eur J Oral Sci. 2016 Aug;124(4):377-86
pubmed: 27315775
J Adhes Dent. 2007;9 Suppl 1:107-16
pubmed: 18341237
Dent Mater. 2010 Mar;26(3):e159-69
pubmed: 20031198
J Adhes Dent. 2008 Aug;10(4):259-67
pubmed: 18792696
Oper Dent. 2018 Mar/Apr;43(2):180-189
pubmed: 29148914
Dent Mater. 2005 May;21(5):397-412
pubmed: 15826696