A comparative microleakage evaluation of three different base materials in Class I cavity in deciduous molars in sandwich technique using dye penetration and dentin surface interface by scanning electron microscope.

INTRODUCTION: A major objective in restorative dentistry is the control of marginal leakage, which may occur because of dimensional changes or lack of adaptation of restorative material to the cavity preparation. Numerous techniques have been advocated to overcome polymerization shrinkage in composite restorations. AIM AND OBJECTIVES: This study investigated microleakage of three different bases under composite resin in sandwich technique using dye penetration and dentin surface interface using scanning electron microscope (SEM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty extracted deciduous molars were stored in distilled water and Class I cavities with a width of about one-fourth of intercuspal distance and a depth of 0.5-1 mm below the dentino-enamel junction was prepared without bevels. In Group 1 - glass ionomer cement (GIC); Group 2 - mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA); Group 3 - Biodentine™ was placed as a base under composite. Teeth were longitudinally sectioned in two halves, through the centers of the restoration, immersed in 2% methylene blue and microleakage was evaluated under stereomicroscope and surface interface between base and dentin was evaluated under SEM. RESULTS: Under the condition of in vitro study, less microleakage and less internal gaps were seen in Biodentine™ (0.00 ± 0.00 and 4.00 ± 1.59) group than MTA (0.00 ± 0.00 and 6.08 ± 1.82) and GIC (25.25 ± 6.57 and 14.73 ± 3.72, respectively) and showed very strong positive correlation between microleakage and internal gaps. CONCLUSION: Biodentine™ exhibits superior marginal sealing ability as well as marginal adaptation under composite resin as compared to MTA and GIC.

Compliance with supportive periodontal therapy among patients with aggressive and chronic periodontitis.

Compliance with supportive periodontal therapy (SPT) depends on many factors but is generally poor. We compared SPT compliance among patients with aggressive and chronic periodontitis. This single-center longitudinal observational study enrolled 101 patients with generalized aggressive periodontitis (GAP; n = 52) or generalized chronic periodontitis (GCP; n = 49) to compare SPT compliance. All participants were studied for 1 year before the close of data collection. Compliance was classified as complete (100% of programmed visits), erratic (≥50% of programmed visits), or noncompliant (<50% of programmed visits). The proportion of compliant participants was greater among patients with GAP (57.7%) than among those with GCP (30.6%) (P < 0.003); 44.9% of patients with GCP and 15.4% of those with GAP were noncompliant. Compliance was significantly associated with age and sex among patients with GAP. In conclusion, SPT compliance was better in patients with GAP than in those with GCP. Patient attitude and self-belief appear to be important factors in SPT compliance.