We have located links that may give you full text access.
Effect of silver diamine fluoride application on the microtensile bond strength of three commonly used restorative materials in primary teeth: An ultrastructural study.
INTRODUCTION: Caries in primary teeth rapidly advances owing to its thin structure, thereby requiring restoration. However, restorations often fail due to various causes such as secondary caries and reduced microtensile bond strength (μTBS), which calls for the use of antimicrobial agents such as silver diamine fluoride (SDF).
AIM: This study aims to measure and analyse the effect of SDF application on the μTBS of three regularly used restorative materials to dentin of primary teeth as well as compare the types of bond failure interfaces under SEM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study comprised 60 samples equally divided into six groups among three restorative materials, namely, glass ionomer cement (GIC, Groups I and II), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC, Groups III and IV), and composite resin (Groups V and VI) with subdivisions of A and B, where A represented samples with SDF application and B represented samples without SDF application.
RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS: It was observed that μTBS of RMGIC to sound and carious dentin irrespective of SDF application was found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05), and when GIC, RMGIC, and composite resins were compared to both sound and carious dentin irrespective of SDF application, it was statistically significant (P < 0.05). SEM analysis revealed predominantly cohesive failures among all the groups.
CONCLUSION: Based on the results, it was concluded that SDF has no adverse effect on the μTBS of GIC, RMGIC, and composite resin to both carious and sound dentin of primary teeth.
AIM: This study aims to measure and analyse the effect of SDF application on the μTBS of three regularly used restorative materials to dentin of primary teeth as well as compare the types of bond failure interfaces under SEM.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study comprised 60 samples equally divided into six groups among three restorative materials, namely, glass ionomer cement (GIC, Groups I and II), resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC, Groups III and IV), and composite resin (Groups V and VI) with subdivisions of A and B, where A represented samples with SDF application and B represented samples without SDF application.
RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS: It was observed that μTBS of RMGIC to sound and carious dentin irrespective of SDF application was found to be statistically significant (P < 0.05), and when GIC, RMGIC, and composite resins were compared to both sound and carious dentin irrespective of SDF application, it was statistically significant (P < 0.05). SEM analysis revealed predominantly cohesive failures among all the groups.
CONCLUSION: Based on the results, it was concluded that SDF has no adverse effect on the μTBS of GIC, RMGIC, and composite resin to both carious and sound dentin of primary teeth.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Central venous catheter insertion site and infection prevention in 2024.Intensive Care Medicine 2024 September 30
Novel Insights into Diabetic Kidney Disease.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 September 23
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of elevated blood pressure and hypertension.European Heart Journal 2024 August 30
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