Efficacy of Four Lining Materials in Sandwich Technique to Reduce Microleakage in Class II Composite Resin Restorations

Moazzami, SM; Sarabi, Nasrin; Hajizadeh, Hila; Majidinia, Sara; Li, Y; Meharry,; Shahrokh, Hosseini Hashemi

doi:10.2341/11-495-l

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the above observations of polyacrylic acid are relevant to the clinical dilemma of whether to directly "bond" a composite restoration in deep cavities or to "base" it with glass ionomer cement. Evidence is currently inconclusive on the comparative superiority of the sandwich technique versus direct composite resin restorations for microleakage control (Kasraei et al 2011;Gungor et al 2014;Moazzami et al 2014). Our findings highlight an important aspect where potential differences exist between the 2 techniques, shifting the balance against the apparently inert glass ionomer system in situations where inducing a reparative response is crucial for the treatment success.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Growth Factor Liberation and DPSC Response Following Dentine Conditioning

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Liberation of the sequestrated bioactive molecules from dentine by the action of applied dental materials has been proposed as an important mechanism in inducing a dentinogenic response in teeth with viable pulps. Although adhesive restorations and dentinebonding procedures are routinely practiced, clinical protocols to improve pulp protection and dentine regeneration are not currently driven by biological knowledge. This study investigated the effect of dentine (powder and slice) conditioning by etchants/conditioners relevant to adhesive restorative systems on growth factor solubilization and odontoblast-like cell differentiation of human dental pulp progenitor cells (DPSCs). The agents included ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA; 10%, pH 7.2), phosphoric acid (37%, pH <1), citric acid (10%, pH 1.5), and polyacrylic acid (25%, pH 3.9). Growth factors were detected in dentine matrix extracts drawn by EDTA, phosphoric acid, and citric acid from powdered dentine. The dentine matrix extracts were shown to be bioactive, capable of stimulating odontogenic/osteogenic differentiation as observed by gene expression and phenotypic changes in DPSCs cultured in monolayer on plastic. Polyacrylic acid failed to solubilize proteins from powdered dentine and was therefore considered ineffective in triggering a growth factor-mediated response in cells. The study went on to investigate the effect of conditioning dentine slices on growth factor liberation and DPSC behavior. Conditioning by EDTA, phosphoric acid, and citric acid exposed growth factors on dentine and triggered an upregulation in genes associated with mineralized differentiation, osteopontin, and alkaline phosphatase in DPSCs cultured on dentine. The cells demonstrated odontoblast-like appearances with elongated bodies and long extracellular processes extending on dentine surface. However, phosphoric acid-treated dentine appeared strikingly less populated with cells, suggesting a detrimental impact on cell attachment and growth when conditioning by this agent. These findings take crucial steps in informing clinical practice on dentineconditioning protocols as far as treatment of operatively exposed dentine in teeth with vital pulps is concerned.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Growth Factor Liberation and DPSC Response Following Dentine Conditioning

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although different techniques have been used to evaluate microleakage ( 16 , 17 ), the dye penetration method was selected for the present study. Although, the semi quantitative dye penetration technique was widely accepted method for in vitro studies, clinical relevance was questioned in a recent systematic review ( 18 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Koubi et al ( 24 ) observed that in open sandwich restorations, resin modified glass ionomer material, Fuji II LC was the best intermediate material. However, Moazzami et al ( 16 ) evaluated the effect of different materials (resin modified glass ionomer, compomer and self-curing resin, flowable composite resin) on the gingival microleakage of Class II open sandwich restorations. As a result, none of the materials enhanced the microleakage scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Saliva Contamination on Microleakage of Open Sandwich Restorations

Çelik

Bayraktar

Özdemir

2020

Acta Stomatol Croat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage of conventional glass-ionomer, resin modified glass-ionomer and glass hybrid ionomer Class II open sandwich restorations with or without saliva contamination. Materials and methods Sixty extracted sound human molar teeth were used and 120 class II slot cavities were prepared in mesial and distal surfaces. The gingival margins were located 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction. All specimens were randomly divided in 4 groups (n=15): Group I: High-Viscous Glass Ionomer (Fuji IX GP) Group II: Resin Modified Glass Ionomer (Fuji II LC) Group III: Glass Hybrid Ionomer (Equia-fil Forte), Group IV: Composite Resin (G'aenial Posterior). In open sandwich restoration groups, glass ionomer materials were placed to gingival floor in 1 mm thickness and rest of the cavity was filled with resin composite. After the restorations in mesial surfaces had been performed, distal cavities were restored with the same protocol after saliva contamination. The specimens were thermo-cycled for 10000 cycles at 5 0 C to 55 0 C and immersed in methylene blue dye solution (% 0,5) for 24 hours. Then, they were sectioned vertically through the center of the restorations from mesial to distal surface with a water-cooled diamond saw with 1mm thickness. Subsequently, the dye penetration was evaluated with image analysis software. Data were statistically analyzed (p<0.05). Results There was a statistically significant difference between gingival microleakage scores in no contamination groups, between high-viscous glass ionomer, Fuji IX GP and other materials tested (p<0.05). In saliva contaminated groups, there was no statistically significant difference between gingival microleakage scores (p>0.05). Additionally, there was not a statistically significant difference between the no contamination and saliva contaminated groups regardless of dental materials tested (p>0.05). Conclusion Within the limitations of this study, in open sandwich restorations, saliva contamination did not show an adverse effect on microleakage irrespective of dental materials tested. Glass hybrid ionomers and resin modified glass ionomers showed lower microleakage scores in gingival margins compared to high-viscous glass ionomer material in no contamination groups.

show abstract

“…A study showed that the traditional sandwich technique using resin-modified glass ionomer cement with resin composite leads to more leakage than that using flowable resin composite does. 32 Therefore, we covered the resin-modified glass ionomer cement liner and the floor of the cavity with a layer of flowable resin composite. Flowable composites showed more stress-buffering capacity and an improved marginal seal than hybrid resin composites did.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Conservative Composite Resin Restoration for Proximal Caries – Two Case Reports</p>

Zaeneldin

Hamama

et al. 2020

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paradigms of contemporary caries management have shifted to minimal intervention dentistry. Conservative restorative procedures are recommended to replace the complete removal of all carious tissues in the management of dental caries. This article reports two clinical cases of conservative restorations of proximal caries. Different conservative cavity designs and restorative techniques were performed in the two cases. Proximal caries in posterior teeth were prepared using the box-only preparation technique or the proximal tunnel preparation technique. The cavities were restored directly with resin composites. The advantages of using the box-only preparation with fissure sealant included the maximum conservation of tooth hard tissues and the prevention of unnecessary tissue removal in the occlusal surface. The tunnel preparation preserved the marginal ridge and protected the restored tooth from fracture. The filling of composites into the tunnel demonstrated a better marginal adaptation than other restorative materials. These two techniques allowed for the preservation of more healthy dental hard tissue compared with traditional techniques. Potential problems in the restoration included the high incidence of the inappropriate removal of dental hard tissue, damage of the vital pulp and the microleakage due to the polymerization shrinkage. The solutions to minimize the risk of these problems in the operative procedures were discussed.

show abstract

Efficacy of Four Lining Materials in Sandwich Technique to Reduce Microleakage in Class II Composite Resin Restorations

Cited by 19 publications

References 24 publications

Growth Factor Liberation and DPSC Response Following Dentine Conditioning

Growth Factor Liberation and DPSC Response Following Dentine Conditioning

Effect of Saliva Contamination on Microleakage of Open Sandwich Restorations

<p>Conservative Composite Resin Restoration for Proximal Caries – Two Case Reports</p>

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About