Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.

BACKGROUND: Resin-based composite (RBC) is currently accepted as a viable material for the restoration of caries for posterior permanent teeth requiring surgical treatment. Despite the fact that the thermal conductivity of the RBC restorative material closely approximates that of natural tooth structure, postoperative hypersensitivity is sometimes still an issue. Dental cavity liners have historically been used to protect the pulp from the toxic effects of some dental restorative materials and to prevent the pain of thermal conductivity by placing an insulating layer between restorative material and the remaining tooth structure. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2016. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of using dental cavity liners in the placement of Class I and Class II resin-based composite posterior restorations in permanent teeth in children and adults. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 12 November 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 10) in the Cochrane Library (searched 12 November 2018), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 12 November 2018), Embase Ovid (1980 to 12 November 2018) and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 12 November 2018). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of the use of liners under Class I and Class II posterior resin-based composite restorations in permanent teeth (in both adults and children). We included both parallel and split-mouth designs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We utilized standard methodological procedures prescribed by Cochrane for data collection and analysis. Two review authors screened the search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion against the review inclusion criteria. We conducted risk of bias assessments and data extraction independently and in duplicate. Where information was unclear we contacted study authors for clarification. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies, recruiting over 700 participants, compared the use of dental cavity liners to no liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.Seven studies evaluated postoperative hypersensitivity measured by various methods. All studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. There was inconsistent evidence regarding postoperative hypersensitivity (either measured using cold response or patient-reported), with a benefit shown at some, but not all, time points (low-quality evidence).Four trials measured restoration longevity. Two of the studies were judged to be at high risk and two at unclear risk of bias. No difference in restoration failure rates were shown at 1 year follow-up, with no failures reported in either group for three of the four studies; the fourth study had a risk ratio (RR) 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 15.00) (low-quality evidence). Three studies evaluated restoration longevity at 2 years follow-up and, again, no failures were shown in either group.No adverse events were reported in any of the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is inconsistent, low-quality evidence regarding the difference in postoperative hypersensitivity subsequent to placing a dental cavity liner under Class I and Class II posterior resin-based composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth in adults or children 15 years or older. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate a difference in the longevity of restorations placed with or without dental cavity liners.

An analysis of the timing and materials associated with pulp disease following restorative dental treatment.

AIM: To assess whether the timing of pulp disease after tooth restoration was associated with type of restorative dental material used, extent of the restoration or tooth type. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive search and analysis of data using the Titanium Oral Health Management software program at The Oral Health Centre of Western Australia were performed to correlate procedural codes for teeth that had restorations placed and subsequently developed pulp disease requiring endodontic treatment or extraction from 1st January 2009 to 31st December 2013. Manual analysis of paper and/or electronic patient record cards was also performed. Data collected included restoration type, restored tooth surfaces, tooth type and the dates of restoration and subsequent endodontic intervention or extraction. RESULTS: Of 330 teeth that met the inclusion criteria, 84 (26%) had composite resin restorations, 80 (24%) had amalgams, 119 (36%) had glass-ionomer cement (GICs), and 47 (14%) had crowns. The average time between restoration and further intervention was 330 days with a range from 3 to 1775 days (approximately 5 years). Teeth restored with crowns or five-surface restorations were significantly more likely to require earlier intervention than other restorations. Premolar and anterior teeth were also more likely to require earlier intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Teeth that developed pulp disease requiring further intervention that were restored with crowns and five-surface GIC developed the disease sooner than teeth that were restored with amalgam or composite. In teeth with five-surface restorations that developed pulp disease requiring further intervention, premolar and anterior teeth developed the pulp disease sooner than molars.

Clinical performance of glass ionomer cement and composite resin in Class II restorations in primary teeth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the clinical performance of glass ionomer cement (GIC) compared to composite resin (CR) in Class II restorations in primary teeth. DATA: Literature search according to PRISMA guidelines including randomized controlled trials comparing Class II restorations performed with GIC, compared to CR, in primary teeth. SOURCES: PubMeb, Scopus, Web of Science, VHL, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials and OpenGrey, regardless of date or language. STUDY: Ten studies were included in qualitative synthesis, and 9 in the meta-analyses (MA). Six studies were classified as low risk of bias, and 4 as "unclear". Heterogeneity ranged from null to high (0% to 73%). GIC and CR presented similar failure patterns (risk difference -0.04 [-0.11, 0.03]; p = 0.25, I2 = 51%), and the exclusion of studies with follow-up period <24 months, or grouping according to the type of GIC (conventional or resin-modified), or according to the type of isolation (cotton roll or rubber dam), or according to the evaluation criteria applied did not affect the pattern of the results obtained. GIC exhibited significantly lower values of secondary carious lesions (SCL) than CR (SCL: risk difference 0.06 [0.02, 0.10], p = 0.008, I2 = 0%). The materials presented similar performance (p > 0.05) regarding the overall effect, as well as for marginal discoloration, marginal adaptation and anatomical form. The superiority of GIC was maintained when resin-modified GIC and rubber dam isolation were analyzed separately. CONCLUSIONS: GIC and CR presented similar clinical performance for all criteria analyzed, except for secondary carious lesions, in which GIC presented superior performance, especially for the resin-modified GIC and with rubber dam isolation.

The use of FDI criteria in clinical trials on direct dental restorations: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: A scoping review was conducted to explore the use of FDI criteria 10 years after their introduction. The first aim was to compare the amount of studies using the FDI and/or the modified USPHS criteria. The second aim was to analyse the use of the FDI criteria in clinical trials evaluating direct dental restorations. DATA: Listing of studies using FDI and/or USPHS criteria per year since 2007. Clinical studies related to the assessment of direct restorations using FDI criteria. SOURCE: Two systematic searches - regarding the use of FDI and modified USPHS criteria - were carried out on Medline/Pubmed in order to identify the studies published between 2007 and 2017. Authors of the included articles were contacted to clarify their choice of FDI criteria in their studies. ClinicalTrials.gov database was also queried for the on-going studies that use FDI and modified USPHS criteria. STUDY SELECTION: In the first review, all the clinical trials (randomized/non-randomized, controlled, prospective/retrospective studies) that used FDI criteria to evaluate direct restorations on primary or permanent teeth were included. CONCLUSIONS: 16.3% of the studies used FDI criteria. The percentage of studies using them increased from 4.5% in 2010 to 50.0% in 2016. In average, 8.5 FDI criteria were used. The most employed criteria were: marginal adaptation (96.7%), staining (90.0%), fracture of material and retention (90.0%), recurrence of caries/erosion/abfraction (90.0%), post-operative sensitivity/tooth vitality (86.7%) and surface luster (60.0%). In addition, among the 27 on-going studies from ClinicalTrials.gov database, 51.9% use FDI criteria (including 87.5% with an open recruitment status). CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: FDI criteria were reported as practical (various and freely selectable), relevant (sensitive as well as appropriate to current restorative materials and clinical studies design), standardized (making comparisons between investigations easier). Investigators should go on using them for a better standardization of their clinical judgment, allowing comparisons with other studies.

Dentists' decision strategies for suspicious occlusal caries lesions in a National Dental PBRN study.

OBJECTIVE: Case presentations (vignettes) were completed by dentists in the National Dental Practice-Based Research Network study "Decision Aids for the Management of Suspicious Occlusal Caries Lesions (SOCLs)". The objective was to determine dentists' decision strategies for SOCLs. METHODS: 107 dentists viewed a series of 16 vignettes that represented all combinations of 4 clinical cues: color, luster, lesion roughness, and patient-level caries risk. Each vignette included a patient description and a photograph of a tooth presenting the 4 cues. Dentists were asked to decide the likelihood that a suspected lesion extended into dentin. A lens model analysis was used to examine how dentists use these cues in making their decisions. RESULTS: 86% of dentists had a consistent pattern of cue use that defined their decision strategy. On average, 70% of the variance in their decisions was accounted for by their use of the 4 cues. However, there was considerable variability in the individual cues used by each dentist. The percentages of dentists who used the different cues consistently were: luster (58%), color (48%), roughness (36%), and risk (35%). 14% of dentists reliably used only color, 7% used only luster, 4% used only roughness, and 1% used only risk when making SOCL decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The online vignette system suggests that clinical SOCL decision strategies are highly individualized and dentists do not use all cues available to them to make these decisions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Prior to this study, there has been little evidence about how dentists use these cues (either individually or in combination) when judging the extent of caries progression. Such knowledge would be valuable when designing interventions to help dentists maximize the likelihood of appropriate treatment decisions.

A new classification system for the restoration of root filled teeth.

The aim of this report is to (i) review the current literature on the status of root filled teeth, (ii) analyse the most important factors in decision-making, (iii) discuss the current restorative concepts, and (iv) classify both the evidence and clinical practice in a way that seeks to be clear, understandable and helpful for clinicians. Restoration of root filled teeth represents a challenge for the clinician and remains a controversial subject. The guidelines describe a new classification that is drawn from evidence presented in the literature and also from clinical expertise-based reviews. It describes five categories of teeth.

Effect of bulk-fill base material on fracture strength of root-filled teeth restored with laminate resin composite restorations.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of using a bulk-fill flowable base material on fracture strength and fracture patterns of root-filled maxillary premolars with MOD preparations restored with laminate restorations. METHODS: Fifty extracted maxillary premolars were selected for the study. Standardized MOD cavities with endodontic treatment were prepared for all teeth, except for intact control. The teeth were divided randomly into five groups (n=10); (Group 1) sound teeth, (Group 2) unrestored teeth; (Group 3) MOD cavities with Vitrebond base and resin-based composite (Ceram. X One Universal); (Group 4) MOD cavities with 2mm GIC base (Fuji IX GP) and resin-based composite (Ceram. X One Universal) open laminate, (Group 5) MOD cavities were restored with 4mm of bulk-fill flowable base material (SDR) and resin-based composite (Ceram. X One Universal). All teeth were thermocycled and subjected to a 45° ramped oblique load in a universal testing machine. Fracture load and fracture patterns were recorded. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Dunnett's T3 test. RESULTS: Restoration in general increased the fracture strength compared to unrestored teeth. The fracture strength of group 5 (bulk-fill) was significantly higher than the fracture strength of the GIC laminate groups and not significantly different from the intact teeth (355±112N, P=0.118). The type of failure was unfavorable for most of the groups, with the majority being mixed failures. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a bulk-fill flowable base material significantly increased the fracture strength of extracted root-filled teeth with MOD cavities; however it did not improve fracture patterns to more favorable ones. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Investigating restorative techniques that may improve the longevity of root-filled premolar teeth restored with direct resin restorations.

Longevity of 2- and 3-surface restorations in posterior teeth of 25- to 30-year-olds attending Public Dental Service-A 13-year observation.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this patient document-based retrospective study among 25- to 30-year-old Finnish adults was to evaluate longevity of 2- and 3-surface posterior restorations according to type of tooth, size of restoration, and restorative material used. METHODS: Data were extracted from electronic patient files of the Helsinki City Public Dental Service (PDS), Finland. A total of 5542 2- and 3-surface posterior composite and amalgam restorations were followed indirectly from 2002 to 2015. Longevity of restorations was illustrated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Annual failure rates (AFRs) of the restorations were calculated separately by type of tooth, size, and material. Differences in longevity were statistically tested with log-rank tests. RESULTS: Composite restorations formed the majority (93%). The longest median survival times and the smallest failure rates were found for teeth in the upper jaw, for premolars, and for 2-surface restorations. Median survival time of all restorations was 9.9 years (95% CI 9.6, 10.2) and re-intervention of restorations occurred less often in the maxilla (AFR 4.0%) than in the mandible (AFR 4.7%). Median survival time of composite restorations was greater for 2-surface than for 3-surface restorations: in premolars 12.3 vs. 9.6 years (p<0.001) and in molars, 9.2 vs. 6.3 years (p<0.001); for molar amalgams the difference (8.0 vs. 6.3 years) was non-significant (p=0.38). Median survival time of 2- and 3-surface restorations in premolars exceeded that in molars (12.0 vs. 8.7 years; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Longevity of posterior composite multisurface restoration is comparable to amalgam longevity. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Regarding material choices for posterior multisurface restorations, composite and amalgam perform quite similarly in molars, 3-surface restoration being challenge for both materials.

Effectiveness of pre-treatment with chlorhexidine in restoration retention: A 36-month follow-up randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of the pre-treatment with 2% chlorhexidine digluconate (CHX) as coadjutant in restoration retention of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCL), after 36 months of follow-up. METHODS: A randomized controlled split-mouth and triple-blind (operators, patients and evaluator) trial was carried out. Patients (n=42) with at least two non-carious cervical lesions were included. The teeth with NCCL were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: application of 2% CHX (experimental group) or a placebo solution (control group) for 60s after acid etching and before the adhesive application. A trained and calibrated examiner evaluated the restorations at baseline (1 week) and at each recall (6, 12, 24 and 36 months) using the FDI criteria. A total of 225 restorations were evaluated after 36-month follow-up. Data were subjected to survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the log-rank test was used to evaluate the existence of differences between the survival curves (α=0.05). RESULTS: The restorations survival rate after 36 months of follow-up was 76.1%. There was no difference in the retention and failure rates between the experimental and the control group (p=0.968). There was an increased failure trend when restorations were located subgingival compared to those at the gingival level or supragingival. CONCLUSION: The pre-treatment with 2% chlorhexidine digluconate did not promote further restoration retention of noncarious cervical lesions. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The cavity pre-treatment with chlorhexidine for inhibition of hybrid layer degradation does not add any beneficial effect to the clinical performance of restorations.

Posterior composites: Update on cavities and filling techniques.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper is to examine cavity design for posterior resin composite restorations and to discuss various resin composite filling techniques. DATA: Literature with regard to cavity preparation for amalgam and resin composite restorations has been reviewed. An overview of available bulkfill resin composite systems is provided and a categorization of these systems according to their clinical application and their intended use is outlined. SOURCES: A literature search was carried out by the authors in Medline. STUDY SELECTION: Pre-defined inclusion criteria based on keywords were included and reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: Minimum cavity preparations are advised for posterior resin composite restorations, preserving the greatest amount of healthy tooth structure. For resin composite restorations only the lesion of caries needs to be removed with all remaining tooth structure protected for the bonding process. The anticipated outcome of this philosophy will result in increased survival of teeth. Newer bulkfill restorative resins offer many advantages such as reduces time for placement.

Re-interventions after restoring teeth-Mining an insurance database.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine re-interventions after restorative treatment. METHODS: The data was collected from the digital database of a major German national health insurance company. Only permanent teeth were observed. Placing a permanent restoration other than a crown regardless of involved surfaces and material was the study intervention. The data did not allow for a differentiation between fillings and inlays that were estimated only a very small portion of the restorations. Success was defined as not undergoing any restorative re-intervention with fillings or inlays on the same tooth (primary outcome) and assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival analyses over four years. An additional analysis was conducted rating "crowning" and "extraction" of respective teeth as target events. Differences were tested with the Log-Rank-test. A multivariate Cox regression analyses was carried out. RESULTS: A total of 17,024,344 restorations placed in 4,825,408 anterior teeth and 9,973,177 posterior teeth could be traced. Focussing on the primary outcome re-intervention, the cumulative four-year success rate was 69.9% for one surface restorations, 74.8% for two surface restorations, 66.6% for three surface restorations and 61.0% for four surface and more extended restorations. These differences were significant (p<0.0001). Focussing on all three target events re-intervention, crowning and extraction, the cumulative four-year success rate was 66.1% for one surface restorations, 67.5% for two surface restorations, 63.0% for three surface restorations and 55.8% for four surface and more extended restorations. The number of restoration surfaces as well as the tooth position remained significant in the multivariate Cox regression. CONCLUSIONS: The sustainability of restorative dental treatment under the terms and conditions of the German national health insurance system shows room for improvement. From a public health perspective, special focus should be laid on primary and secondary prevention to minimize the restorative treatment need. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This study shows that re-interventions are observed regularly after restorative treatment. Therefore, preventive and restorative strategies should be revisited and optimised.

Dental cavity liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.

BACKGROUND: Resin-based composite (RBC) is currently accepted as a viable material for the restoration of caries for posterior permanent teeth requiring surgical treatment. Despite the fact that the thermal conductivity of the RBC restorative material closely approximates that of natural tooth structure, postoperative hypersensitivity is sometimes still an issue. Dental cavity liners have historically been used to protect the pulp from the toxic effects of some dental restorative materials and to prevent the pain of thermal conductivity by placing an insulating layer between restorative material and the remaining tooth structure. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of using dental cavity liners in the placement of Class I and Class II resin-based composite posterior restorations in permanent teeth in children and adults. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 25 May 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library (searched 25 May 2016), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 25 May 2016), Embase Ovid (1980 to 25 May 2016) and LILACS BIREME Virtual Health Library (Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information database; 1982 to 25 May 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of the use of liners under Class I and Class II posterior resin-based composite restorations in permanent teeth (in both adults and children). We included both parallel and split-mouth designs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We utilized standard methodological procedures prescribed by Cochrane for data collection and analysis. Two review authors screened the search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion against the review inclusion criteria. We conducted risk of bias assessments and data extraction independently and in duplicate. Where information was unclear we contacted study authors for clarification. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies, recruiting over 700 participants, compared the use of dental cavity liners to no liners for Class I and Class II resin-based composite restorations.Seven studies evaluated postoperative hypersensitivity measured by various methods. All studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. There was inconsistent evidence regarding postoperative hypersensitivity (either measured using cold response or patient-reported), with a benefit shown at some, but not all, time points (low-quality evidence).Four trials measured restoration longevity. Two of the studies were judged to be at high risk and two at unclear risk of bias. No difference in restoration failure rates were shown at one year follow-up, with no failures reported in either group for three of the four studies; the fourth study had a risk ratio (RR) 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 15.00) (low-quality evidence). Three studies evaluated restoration longevity at two years follow-up and, again, no failures were shown in either group.No adverse events were reported in any of the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is inconsistent, low-quality evidence regarding the difference in postoperative hypersensitivity subsequent to placing a dental cavity liner under Class I and Class II posterior resin-based composite restorations in permanent posterior teeth in adults or children 15 years or older. Furthermore, no evidence was found to demonstrate a difference in the longevity of restorations placed with or without dental cavity liners.

Comparative evaluation of microleakage of a carbomer/fluoroapatite-enhanced glass-ionomer cement on primary teeth restorations.

AIM: Carbomer cement represents a novel glass-ionomer which gradually mineralises into fluoroapatite. Purpose of this study was to evaluate microleakage around restorations in deciduous teeth made with composite resin, conventional glass-ionomer cement, resin-modified glass-ionomer cement and carbomer/fluoroapatite-enhanced glass-ionomer cement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A group of 40 primary upper canines, primary upper and lower molars was divided into 4 groups (n=10). Class I cavities were prepared by diamond cylindrical bur at high speed and were restored with a composite resin (Group 1), with a glass- ionomer cement (Group 2), with a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Group 3) and with a carbomer/fluoroapatite-enhanced glass- ionomer cement (Group 4). Hard tissue's bonding involved, in the case of composite resin a total etch bonding procedure, and in glass ionomers the use of their respective primers. Restorations were finished and polished. A 24-hour water storage was followed by thermocycling (1500 cycles, 5°C - 36°C - 55°C - 36°C with a dwell time of 15 seconds) and dye penetration test with immersion in 5% methylene blue for 24 hours. In order to assess the degree of microleakage longitudinal cuts were produced by means of a microtome at 0.5 mm and at 1 mm from the restoration margin, and photographs were taken with a stereomicroscope at 100X. Microleakage was classified according to the number of surfaces and the depth at which dye penetration was observed. Data were analysed with ANOVA and post-hoc analysis was performed with Bonferonni test (p<0.05). RESULTS: Statistical analysis exhibited no significant statistical difference between Group 2 and Group 3 (p>0.05). Statistical difference was exhibited between Group 3 and Group 4 (p<0.01), with Group 4 exhibiting lower microleakage values. Group 1 exhibited the lowest mean microleakage values and statistical difference in comparison with all groups (p<0.001). Group 4 exhibited the lowest microleakage values among the cements. CONCLUSION: Superior marginal integrity is achieved in restored primary teeth when composite resin is used. If the clinical case suggests the use of a glass-ionomer cement, carbomer/fluoroapatite-enhanced glass-ionomer cement is prefered in terms of microleakage.

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.

An In-VitroEvaluation of Microleakage at the Cervical Margin Between two Different Class II Restorative Techniques Using Dye Penetration Method.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the coronal microleakage of packable composite using conventional incremental and posterior bulk fill flowable composite using Smart Dentine Replacement Single Step technique in the cervical margins of class II cavities in dentine using the dye penetration method. STUDY DESIGN: In-vitroInterventional study. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Department of Operative Dentistry, Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan Institute of Oral Health Sciences (DIKIOHS), Karachi, from November 2012 to April 2013. METHODOLOGY: One hundred and twenty extracted teeth (molars and premolars) were collected and randomly divided into two experimental groups (n=60 each) and were stored in normal saline until used. Fractured samples were excluded. Standardized class II proximal box only cavities were prepared and restored with conventional methacrylate based composite using incremental technique (Group A, n=40) and low stress methacrylate resin based composite SDR using single step technique (Group B, n=40). Samples were sectioned horizontally below the cervical margins and specimen disks were prepared. The specimens were thermocycled and sealed with acid resistant varnish leaving a 1-mm interface around cervical margin and immersed in 2% methylene blue buffered solution for 24 hours. Leakage was scored 0 - 4 and measured in mm. It washed and sectioned to evaluate under stereomicroscope. RESULTS: Mean penetration was 2.4280 ±0.79 mm for Group Aand 1.015 ±0.45 mm for Group B (p < 0.001). Maximum dye penetration score for group Awas 4 and group B was 3. CONCLUSION: SDR technique in combination with total etch technique at the cervical margin of class II restorations improved the marginal seal, when were placed in dentine and thermocycled.

Diagnostic accuracy of different display types in detection of recurrent caries under restorations by using CBCT.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the in vitro diagnostic ability of CBCT images using seven different display types in the detection of recurrent caries. METHODS: Our study comprised 128 extracted human premolar and molar teeth. 8 groups each containing 16 teeth were obtained as follows: (1) Black Class I (Occlusal) amalgam filling without caries; (2) Black Class I (Occlusal) composite filling without caries; (3) Black Class II (Proximal) amalgam filling without caries; (4) Black Class II (Proximal) composite filling without caries; (5) Black Class I (Occlusal) amalgam filling with caries; (6) Black Class I (Occlusal) composite filling with caries; (7) Black Class II (Proximal) amalgam filling with caries; and (8) Black Class II (Proximal) composite filling with caries. Teeth were imaged using 100 × 90 mm field of view at three different voxel sizes of a CBCT unit (Planmeca ProMax(®) 3D ProFace™; Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland). CBCT TIFF images were opened and viewed using custom-designed software for computers on different display types. Intra- and interobserver agreements were calculated. The highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (Az) values for each image type, observer, reading and restoration were compared using z-tests against Az = 0.5. The significance level was set at p = 0.05. RESULTS: We found poor and moderate agreements. In general, Az values were found when software and medical diagnostic monitor were utilized. For Observer 2, Az values were statistically significantly higher when software was used on medical monitor [p = 0.036, p = 0.015 and p = 0.002, for normal-resolution mode (0.200 mm(3) voxel size), high-resolution mode (0.150 mm(3) voxel size) and low-resolution mode (0.400 mm(3) voxel size), respectively]. No statistically significant differences were found among other display types for all modes (p > 0.05). In general, no difference was found among 3 different voxel sizes (p > 0.05). In general, higher Az values were obtained for composite restorations than for amalgam restorations for all observers. For Observer 1, Az values for composite restorations were statistically significantly higher than those of amalgam restorations for MacBook and iPhone (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA) assessments (p = 0.002 and p = 0.048, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Higher Az values were observed with medical monitors when used with dedicated software compared to other display types which performed similarly in the diagnosis of recurrent caries under restorations. In addition, observers performed better in detection of recurrent caries when assessing composite restorations than amalgams.

Evaluation of Microleakage of Nanoionomer and Nanocomposite Restorations, immersed in Fruit Drink, Fresh Fruit Juice and Soft Drink--An in vitro Study.

AIM: To evaluate microleakage of Nanoionomer (3M ESPE Ketac(™) N100 Light cured Nanoionomer Restorative) and Nanocomposite (3M ESPE Filtek(™) Z350 XT Universal Restorative) restorations, immersed in fruit drink, fresh fruit juice and soft drink. STUDY DESIGN: Eighty caries free maxillary premolars extracted for orthodontic purpose were used for the study. Class V cavities were prepared and restored with Nanocomposite on buccal surface and Nanoionomer on the palatal surface. The teeth were thermocycled following the restoration. The experimental groups comprised of 72 teeth (3 groups comprising 24 teeth each for fruit drink, fresh fruit juice and soft drink), while remaining 8 formed the control group. Each of experimental group was further divided into three subgroups (low, medium and high immersion). The teeth were finally immersed in Rhodamine B dye, sectioned and evaluated under stereomicroscope. Statistical analyses used were Mann-Whitney test and ANOVA test. RESULTS: The teeth showed statistically significant microleakage as the immersion regime increased. Soft drink group showed highest microleakage followed by fresh fruit juice and fruit drink. Nanocomposite exhibited more microleakage but the comparison was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The three beverages used in the study affected the microleakage of both restorative materials significantly. The microleakage scores increased as the frequency of the immersions increased. Soft drink caused highest microleakage followed by fresh fruit juice and fruit drink.

In Vitro Evaluation of Microleakage and Microhardness of Ethanolic Extracts of Propolis in Different Proportions Added to Glass Ionomer Cement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of ethanolic extracts of propolis (EEP) addition in different proportions to glass ionomer cement (GIC) on microleakage and microhardness of GIC. STUDY DESIGN: The cement was divided into four groups: one using the original composition and three with 10%, 25%, and 50% EEP added to the liquid and then manipulated. For microleakage assessment, sixty primary molars were randomly divided into four groups (n=15). Standard Class II cavities were prepared and then filled with EEP in different proportions added to GICs. Microleakage test was performed using a dye penetration method. The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U tests (α = 0.05). Disc shaped specimens were prepared from the tested GIC to determine Vickers hardness (VHN). The data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey test (α = 0.05). RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of microleakage (p > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences between the VHN values of groups (p < 0.05). Increasing addition of EEP to GIC statistically significantly increased VHN value of GIC (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of EEP to GIC increased the microhardness of the GIC and did not adversely affect the microleakage. Thus, it might be used during routine dental practice due to its antibacterial properties.