2015•Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive DentistryOpen access

Comparative evaluation of microleakage of conventional and modifications of glass ionomer cement in primary teeth: An in vitro study

NB Nagaveni, AS Shruthi, P Poornima, M Selvamani, GS Madhushankari, VV Subba Reddy

Open full text 18 citations

Abstract

AIMS: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage among conventional, resin modified glass ionomer cements (GIC), and compomer cements in primary teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five over retained non carious primary molars beyond exfoliation time were collected and randomly divided into three groups (n = 15). Group A: GC Fuji II; Group B: Vitremer; Group C: Compoglass F. A standard Class V cavity was prepared on the buccal surface of each tooth with no mechanical retention and restored accordingly. Then all the samples were subjected to thermocycling for 250 cycles at different temperatures and covered with nail varnish. Later, samples were immersed in 0.5% methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned buccolingually through the center of the restoration and studied under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Data obtained were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Samples restored with vitremer showed comparatively higher microleakage than the samples in other groups. However, overall there were no significant difference between the microleakage scores of the samples in all three groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that none of the three GICs was free from microleakage. Hence, further research is required to compare microleakage of the newer material.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIMS: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage among conventional, resin modified glass ionomer cements (GIC), and compomer cements in primary teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five over retained non carious primary molars beyond exfoliation time were collected and randomly divided into three groups (n = 15). Group A: GC Fuji II; Group B: Vitremer; Group C: Compoglass F. A standard Class V cavity was prepared on the buccal surface of each tooth with no mechanical retention and restored accordingly. Then all the samples were subjected to thermocycling for 250 cycles at different temperatures and covered with nail varnish. Later, samples were immersed in 0.5% methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned buccolingually through the center of the restoration and studied under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Data obtained were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Samples restored with vitremer showed comparatively higher microleakage than the samples in other groups. However, overall there were no significant difference between the microleakage scores of the samples in all three groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that none of the three GICs was free from microleakage. Hence, further research is required to compare microleakage of the newer material.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 18 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIMS: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage among conventional, resin modified glass ionomer cements (GIC), and compomer cements in primary teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five over retained non carious primary molars beyond exfoliation time were collected and randomly divided into three groups (n = 15). Group A: GC Fuji II; Group B: Vitremer; Group C: Compoglass F. A standard Class V cavity was prepared on the buccal surface of each tooth with no mechanical retention and restored accordingly. Then all the samples were subjected to thermocycling for 250 cycles at different temperatures and covered with nail varnish. Later, samples were immersed in 0.5% methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned buccolingually through the center of the restoration and studied under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Data obtained were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Samples restored with vitremer showed comparatively higher microleakage than the samples in other groups. However, overall there were no significant difference between the microleakage scores of the samples in all three groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It can be concluded that none of the three GICs was free from microleakage. Hence, further research is required to compare microleakage of the newer material.

Key concepts: Glass ionomer cement, Dentistry, Stereo microscope, Molar, Varnish, Materials science, Significant difference, Orthodontics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative evaluation of microleakage of conventional and modifications of glass ionomer cement in primary teeth: An in vitro study — Research Paper | ScholarLens