Evaluation of the microleakage of different class V cavities prepared by using Er:YAG laser, ultrasonic device, and conventional rotary instruments with two dentin bonding systems (an in vitro study)

被引:0
作者
Gullshang Muhammed
Raad Dayem
机构
来源
Lasers in Medical Science | 2015年 / 30卷
关键词
Er:YAG laser; Ultrasonic; Single bonding; Swiss TEC SL bond; Microleakage;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This study aimed to evaluate the extent of microleakage in class V cavities prepared with bur, Er:YAG laser, and ultrasonic, hybridized with two different bonding agents (“Single bonding” solvent-free bonding agent and “Swiss TEC SL bond” alcohol-based solvent). Thirty freshly extracted human premolars were divided into three groups (n = 10), on each tooth, two cavities were prepared on the buccal and the lingual surfaces, and each group was subdivided into two subgroups (n = 5). Group 1: 20 cavities were prepared by using Er:YAG laser (500 mJ, 10 Hz, 63.69 J/cm2) (subgroup1a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 1b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Group 2: 20 cavities were prepared by using ultrasonic (subgroup 2a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 2b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Group 3: 20 cavities were prepared by using burs (subgroup 3a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 3b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Cavities were restored with a micro-hybrid composite resin. After thermocycling, the specimens were immersed in 2 % methylene blue solution for 4 h and then sectioned in the bucco-lingual direction. Dye penetration was scored based upon the extent of the dye using a stereomicroscope. The two-way ANOVA test and paired t-test revealed no statistically significant differences among the methods of preparation (conventional, laser, and ultrasonic). However, statistical differences were found between the adhesives tested: the “Single bonding”, which represented the solvent-free bonding agent, had lower microleakage values than “Swiss TEC SL bond”, which represented the alcohol-based bonding agent. Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the Erbium:Yttrium-Aluminum Garnet (Er:YAG) laser and ultrasonic are as effective as the conventional method for preparing cavities and the extent of microleakage depends on the type of the bonding agents.
引用
收藏
页码:969 / 975
页数:6
相关论文
共 113 条
[1]  
Lima LM(2006)Cutting characteristics of dental diamond burs made with CVD technology Braz Oral Res 20 155-161
[2]  
Motisuki C(1989)Experimental studies of the application of the Er:YAG laser on dental hard substances: I. Measurement of the ablation rate Lasers Surg Med 9 338-344
[3]  
Corat EJ(1999)Ablation depths and morphological changes in human enamel and dentin after Er:YAG laser irradiation with or without water mist J Clin Laser Med Surg 17 105-109
[4]  
Santos-pinto L(1995)Lasers in dentistry Lasers Surg Med 16 103-133
[5]  
Santos-pinto A(1955)Ultrasonic dental cutting instrument: I JADA 50 392-398
[6]  
Hibst R(2006)Use of CVDent US diamond tips for ultrasound in cavity preparation J Contemp Dent Pract 7 3-11
[7]  
Keller U(2000)Microleakage of a condensable resin composite: an in vitro investigation J Dent Res 31 430-434
[8]  
Hossain M(2002)Effect of collagen removal on microleakage of resin composite restorations Oper Dent 27 38-43
[9]  
Nakamura Y(2000)Effect of prebonding procedures on shear bond strength of resin composite to pressable ceramic Gen Dent 48 412-416
[10]  
Yamada Y(1994)Altered tissue contribution to interfacial bond strength with acid conditioned dentin Am J Dent 7 243-246