File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Marginal adaptation of a new compomer under different conditioning methods

TitleMarginal adaptation of a new compomer under different conditioning methods
Authors
KeywordsConditioning
In vitro test
Marginal adaptation
Polyacid-modified composite resin
Issue Date2000
PublisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jdent
Citation
Journal Of Dentistry, 2000, v. 28 n. 7, p. 495-500 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: This in vitro study evaluated the marginal adaptation of compomer restorations placed using three different conditioning protocols. Materials and methods: Thirty extracted caries-free molars with 3 mm diameter cylindrical cavity preparations were divided randomly into three groups based upon the conditioning treatment used: (I) 36% phosphoric acid; (II) non-rinse conditioner (NRC, Dentsply DeTrey); and (III) no conditioning. Cavities were restored with Dyract AP using Prime&Bond NT (Dentsply DeTrey) as an adhesive. Silicone impressions of the briefly etched enamel surfaces were taken after finishing the restorations. Each sample was then longitudinally sectioned and impressions were taken. Epoxy resin replicas were prepared for SEM analysis. Qualitative and quantitative assessment were performed separately for the enamel- and dentine-restorative interface. Results: Enamel fractures and open margins along the enamel-restorative margin were observed in some specimens in each group. No statistically significant difference was found in the percentage of gaps/cohesive failures between specimens prepared using different conditioning methods. For the dentine-restorative interface, uniform hybrid layers and long resin tags were often observed in Groups I and II. The hybrid layer in Group III was irregular and discontinuous along the interface. A significant difference (p < 0.01) in the proportion of marginal gap was found between Group I (2%) and Group III (30%). Conclusions: Pre-treating the cavity with 36% phosphoric acid significantly improved the adaptation of the compomer and adhesive to dentine compared with no etching. The marginal quality at the enamel-compomer interface was not affected by the conditioning method used. © 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66839
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.109
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.029
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLuo, Yen_HK
dc.contributor.authorTay, FRen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLo, ECMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWei, SHYen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T05:49:47Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T05:49:47Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_HK
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Dentistry, 2000, v. 28 n. 7, p. 495-500en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0300-5712en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66839-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: This in vitro study evaluated the marginal adaptation of compomer restorations placed using three different conditioning protocols. Materials and methods: Thirty extracted caries-free molars with 3 mm diameter cylindrical cavity preparations were divided randomly into three groups based upon the conditioning treatment used: (I) 36% phosphoric acid; (II) non-rinse conditioner (NRC, Dentsply DeTrey); and (III) no conditioning. Cavities were restored with Dyract AP using Prime&Bond NT (Dentsply DeTrey) as an adhesive. Silicone impressions of the briefly etched enamel surfaces were taken after finishing the restorations. Each sample was then longitudinally sectioned and impressions were taken. Epoxy resin replicas were prepared for SEM analysis. Qualitative and quantitative assessment were performed separately for the enamel- and dentine-restorative interface. Results: Enamel fractures and open margins along the enamel-restorative margin were observed in some specimens in each group. No statistically significant difference was found in the percentage of gaps/cohesive failures between specimens prepared using different conditioning methods. For the dentine-restorative interface, uniform hybrid layers and long resin tags were often observed in Groups I and II. The hybrid layer in Group III was irregular and discontinuous along the interface. A significant difference (p < 0.01) in the proportion of marginal gap was found between Group I (2%) and Group III (30%). Conclusions: Pre-treating the cavity with 36% phosphoric acid significantly improved the adaptation of the compomer and adhesive to dentine compared with no etching. The marginal quality at the enamel-compomer interface was not affected by the conditioning method used. © 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jdenten_HK
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Dentistryen_HK
dc.rightsJournal of Dentistry. Copyright © Elsevier Ltd.en_HK
dc.subjectConditioningen_HK
dc.subjectIn vitro testen_HK
dc.subjectMarginal adaptationen_HK
dc.subjectPolyacid-modified composite resinen_HK
dc.titleMarginal adaptation of a new compomer under different conditioning methodsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0300-5712&volume=28&spage=495&epage=500&date=2000&atitle=Marginal+adaptation+of+a+new+compomer+under+different+conditioning+methodsen_HK
dc.identifier.emailLo, ECM:hrdplcm@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLo, ECM=rp00015en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0300-5712(00)00033-6-
dc.identifier.pmid10960753-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0034268545en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros58266en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0034268545&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume28en_HK
dc.identifier.issue7en_HK
dc.identifier.spage495en_HK
dc.identifier.epage500en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000089146800006-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLuo, Y=49161174100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTay, FR=7102091962en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLo, ECM=7101705982en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWei, SHY=7401765260en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats