Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 81

Warning: fopen(upload/ip_log/ip_log_2024-12.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 83

Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 84
Dentin permeability change according to the process of compomer restoration


Your browser does not support the NLM PubReader view.

Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.

Dentin permeability change according to the process of compomer restoration

Article information

Restor Dent Endod. 2002;27(4):382-388
Publication date (electronic) : 2002 July 31
doi : https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.4.382
Hye-jin Cho, Kyung-Ha Lee, Se-Joon Lee, Kwang-Won Lee
Department of Conservative Dentistry & Institute for Oral Bioscience, College of Dentistry, Chonbuk National University, Korea.

Abstract

Compomer is composed of matrix and filler; matrix is made of the combination of resins and polycarboxylic molecules that are light-cured, and a filler is a glass component which is capable of ion-release. The resin content of compomers produces polymerization shrinkage which can adversely affect marginal adaptation. Pretreatment is a fundamental step which is treated with conditioner or primer in the use of these materials.

Microleakage of restorative materials has been investigated mostly by dye penetration method. Dye penetration method was not quantitative and not measured repeatedly. Fluid filtration method, introduced and developed by Pashley's group, has been extensively used for 20 years for research purpose to understand the physiology of dentin, as well as the effects of various restorative treatments on dentin permeability. It permits quantitative, nondestructive measurment of microleakage in a longitudinal manner. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the change of dentin permeability according to the process of compomer restoration.

In this study, ClV cavities were prepared on buccal surface of thirty extracted human molars. The prepared cavities were etched by 37% phosphoric acid. The experimental teeth were randomly divided into three groups. Each group was treated with following materials; Group 1 : Prime & Bond NT/Dyract AP, Group2 : Single Bond/F2000 compomer, Group 3 : Syntac Single Component/Compoglass. The bonding agent and compomer were applied for each group following manufacturers information. Dentin permeability of each group was measured at each process by fluid filtration method; Step 1 : preparation(smear layer), Step 2 : etching(smear layer removal), Step 3 : applying the bonding agent, Step 4 : filling the compomer. Dentin permeability was expressed by hydraulic conductance(µl min-1cmH2O-1).

The data were analysed statistically using One-way ANOVA and Sheffe's method.

The results were as follows :

1. Dentin permeability differences between each process were significant except between step 1 and step 2(p<0.01).

2. Dentin permeability after removal of smear layer was highly increased(p<0.01).

3. In most case, decrease of dentin permeability was obtained by applying bonding agent(p<0.01).

4. Dentin permeability differences among the experimental groups were not significant(p>0.05).

5. None of compomers used in this study showed perfect seal at the interface.

References

1. McLean JW, Nicholson JW, Wilson AD. Proposed nomenclature for glass-ionomer dental cements and related materials. Quintessence Int 1994. 25587–589.
2. Van Dijken JW. 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a resin-modified glass ionomer and a resin composite in Class III restorations. Am J Dent 1996. 9195–198.
3. Abdalla Al, Alhadainy HA, Garcia-Godoy F. Clinical evaluation of glass ionomers and compomers in Class V carious lesions. Am J Dent 1997. 1018–20.
4. Kakabura A, Eliades G, Palahias G. Evaluation of the extent of the acid-base reaction on Dyract restorative material. J Dent Res 1996. 751218. [Abstract 9].
5. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vangerle G. Comparative physico-mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials. J Dent Res 1997. 76883–894.
6. Triana R, Prado C, Garro J, Garcia-Godoy F. Dentin bond strength of fluoride-releasing materials. Am J Dent 1994. 7252–254.
7. Ferrari M, Vichi A, Mannocci , Davidson CL. Sealing ability of two "compomers" applied with and without phosphoric acid treatment for Class V restorations in vivo. J Prosthet Dent 1998. 79131–135.
8. Tyas MJ. Clinical Evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite(compomer). Oper Dent 1998. 2377–80.
9. Brackett WW, Gunnin TD, Gilpatrick RO, Browning WD. Microleakage of Class V compomer and light-curing glass ionomer restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1998. 79261–263.
10. Toledano M, Osorio E, Osorio R, Garcia-Godoy F. Microleakage of Class V resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer restorations. J Prosthet Dent 1999. 81610–615.
11. Attin T, Buchalla W, Kielbassa AM, Helwig E. Curing shrinkage and volumetric changes of rein-modified glass ionomer restorative materials. Dent Mater 1995. 11359–362.
12. Kidd EA. Microleakage: a review. J Dent 1976. 4199–206.
13. Davidson CL. Resisting the curing contraction with adhesive composites. J Prosthet Dent 1986. 55446–447.
14. Feilzer AJ, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Relaxation of polymerization contraction shear stress by hygroscopic expansion. J Dent Res 1990. 6936–39.
15. Outhwaite WC, Livingston MJ, Pashley DH. Effects of changes in surface area, thickness, temperature and post-extraction time on human dentine permeability. Arch Oral Biol 1976. 21599–603.
16. Derkson GD, Pashley DH, Derkson ME. Microleakage measurement of selected restorative materials: A new in vitro method. J Prosthet Dent 1986. 56435–440.
17. Wu MK, Wesselink PR. Endodontic leakage studies reconsidered. part 1. Methodology, application and relevance. Int Endod J 1993. 2637–43.
18. Pommel L, Camps J. Effects of Pressure and Measurement time on the fluid filtration method in endodontics. J Endod 2001. 27256–258.
19. Otsuki M. Histological study on pulpal response to restorative composite resins and their ingredients. J Stomatol Soc Jpn 1988. 55203.
20. Ciucchi B, Bouillaquet S, Holz J, Pashley D. Dentinal fluid dynamics in human teeth, in vivo. J Endod 1995. 21191–194.
21. Kugel G, Perry RD, Hoang E, Ferrari M. Dyract compomer: Comparison of total etch vs. no etch technique. Gen Dent 1998. 46604–606.
22. Ferrari M, Mannocci F, Kugel G, Garcia-Godoy F. Standardized microscopic evaluation of the bonding mechanism of NRC/Prime & Bond NT. Am J Dent 1999. 1277–83.
23. Hansen SE, Swift EJ Jr, Krell KV. Permeability effects of two dentin adhesive systems. J Esthet Dent 1992. 4169–171.
24. Yoo HM, Park DS, Oh TS. Microleakage of class v compomer restorations. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2000. 2541–45.
25. Jang HJ, Lee HJ, Hur B. Comparison of marginal leakage of wedge-shaped class v cavity according to restorative materials. J Korean Acad Conserv Dent 2000. 2556–62.
26. Bourke AM, Walls AWG, McCabe JF. Light-activated glass polyalkenoate(ionomer) cements: The setting reaction. J Dent 1992. 20115–120.
27. Darbyshire PA, Messer LB, Douglas WH. Microleakage in Class II composite restorations bonded to using thermal and load cycling. J Dent Res 1988. 67585–587.
28. Litkowski KJ, McDonald NJ, Swierczewski MA. A comparison of thermocycling methods for evaluating microleakage. J Dent Res 1989. 68Abstract 208.
29. Hakimeh S, Vaidyanathan J. Microleakage of compomer Class V restorations: Effect of load cycling, thermal cycling, and cavity shape differences. J Prosthet Dent 2000. 83194–203.

Article information Continued

Copyright © 2002 Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
(open-access) :

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Schematic diagram of fluid filtration device

Fig. 2

Fig. 2

The difference of fluid conductance in compomers used in the experiment.

Fig. 3

Fig. 3

The difference of fluid conductance according to the each process of compomer restoration.

Fig. 4

Fig. 4

Degree of dye penetration. A,B. After etching. C,D. After applying the bonding agent(Prime&Bond NT). E,F. After compomer filling(F2000, Compoglass flow).

Table 1

Materials used in this study.

Table 1

Table 2

Process of compomer restoration

Table 2

Table 3

Results of dentin permeability(×10-3µl min-1 cmH2O-1).

Table 3