dc.contributor.author | Kimyai, S | |
dc.contributor.author | Mohammadi, N | |
dc.contributor.author | Alizadeh Oskoee, P | |
dc.contributor.author | Pournaghi-Azar, F | |
dc.contributor.author | Ebrahimi Chaharom, ME | |
dc.contributor.author | Amini, M | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-08-26T06:10:23Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-08-26T06:10:23Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://dspace.tbzmed.ac.ir:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/42580 | |
dc.description.abstract | This study was aimed at evaluating the effect of different prophylaxis methods on microleak-age of microfilled composite restorations.In this in vitro study, class V cavities were prepared on buccal surfaces of 84 bovine teeth. The teeth were restored with Tetric N-Bond adhesive and Heliomolar composite resin. Subsequent to a thermocycling procedure and three months of storage in distilled water, the teeth were randomly assigned to four groups (n=21): (1) prophylaxis with a rubber cup and pumice; (2) prophylaxis with a brush and pumice; (3) prophylaxis with air/powder polishing device; and (4) no prophylaxis (the control group). Then the teeth were immersed in 2% basic fuchsin for 24 hours and sectioned for microleakage evaluation under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon Signed Rankstests. Statistical significance was defined at p<0.05.There were no statistically significant differences in occlusal and gingival microleakage between the groups (p=0.996 and p=0.860, respectively). In all the groups gingival margins exhibited significantly higher microleakage values compared to occlusal margins (p<0.0005).Prophylaxis methods had no adverse effect on marginal leakage of microfilled composite resin restorations. | |
dc.language.iso | English | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of dental research, dental clinics, dental prospects | |
dc.title | Effect of different prophylaxis methods on microleakage of microfilled composite restorations. | |
dc.type | article | |
dc.citation.volume | 6 | |
dc.citation.issue | 2 | |
dc.citation.spage | 65 | |
dc.citation.epage | 9 | |
dc.citation.index | Pubmed | |
dc.identifier.DOI | https://doi.org/10.5681/joddd.2012.014 | |