We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Microleakage in class II restorations: open vs closed centripetal build-up technique.
Operative Dentistry 2010 May
PURPOSE: This study evaluated whether a Class II restoration in a flowable resin composite has to be placed prior to (open-sandwich technique) or after (closed-sandwich technique) construction of the interproximal wall in the centripetal build-up technique in order to reduce microleakage.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty non-carious molars were selected and randomly divided into two groups (n = 15). A standardized Class H preparation was made with the cervical margin 1 mm below the cementum-enamel junction. In Group 1, flowable resin composite was applied as a 1 mm base, remaining exposed at the cervical margin. In Group 2, the hybrid resin composite was applied to the interproximal wall, followed by a layer of flowable composite on the pulpal floor, away from the margins. The restorations were then subjected to 500 thermal cycles, each with a dwell time of 20 seconds at 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. Adaptation at the cervical margin was evaluated by dye penetration and SEM analysis using the replica technique. The data were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: The centripetal open-sandwich technique led to significantly lower dye penetration than the centripetal closed-sandwich technique (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Flowable resin composite placed under hybrid resin composites in Group 1 provided better marginal adaptation and fewer voids. However, neither Group 1 nor Group 2 was able to completely prevent microleakage.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirty non-carious molars were selected and randomly divided into two groups (n = 15). A standardized Class H preparation was made with the cervical margin 1 mm below the cementum-enamel junction. In Group 1, flowable resin composite was applied as a 1 mm base, remaining exposed at the cervical margin. In Group 2, the hybrid resin composite was applied to the interproximal wall, followed by a layer of flowable composite on the pulpal floor, away from the margins. The restorations were then subjected to 500 thermal cycles, each with a dwell time of 20 seconds at 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. Adaptation at the cervical margin was evaluated by dye penetration and SEM analysis using the replica technique. The data were statistically analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test (p < 0.05).
RESULTS: The centripetal open-sandwich technique led to significantly lower dye penetration than the centripetal closed-sandwich technique (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Flowable resin composite placed under hybrid resin composites in Group 1 provided better marginal adaptation and fewer voids. However, neither Group 1 nor Group 2 was able to completely prevent microleakage.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app