3种可流动材料充填人离体牙Ⅴ类洞模型后微渗漏发生情况及影响因素

doi:10.13481/j.1671-587X.20220108

Abstract

Abstract: Object

To compare the degrees of occurrence of microleakage of class Ⅴ cavities of the isolated teeth filled with three flowing materials Z350XT flowing resin， Beautifil Flow Plus F00 and PRG Barrier Coat and the influence of saliva， and to select the suitable materials for wedge-shape defects.

Methods

A total of 42 isolated first premolars were selected，and 24 isolated teeth were used in the experiment without saliva and were randomly divided into 4 groups： Z350XT flowing resin， Beautifil Flow Plus F00， PRG Barrier Coat and glass ionomer cement （GIC）（n=6）. A total of 18 isolated first premolars were used in the experiment with saliva and were randomly divided into 3 groups： Z350XT flowing resin， Beautifil Flow Plus F00 and PRG Barrier Coat （n=6）.The class Ⅴ cavity was made on the facial surface of each isolated tooth in the experiment without saliva and was filled with the corespondent materials. The samples in the experiment with saliva were soaked in artificial saliva after coated with 3M single bond universal adhesive， and then were filled with the correspondent materials. After thermocycling， the apical foramens were closed with plastomer and the samples were stained with methylene blue solution. The sections were made. The dye depths，namely microleakage degrees，of the isolated tooth in each group were observed and measured under stereoscopic microscope，and the microleakage degree scores were calculated.

Results

In the experiment without saliva，the microleakage degree and the microleakage score in GIC group were higher than those of the other groups without saliva（P<0.05）；the microleakage degree and the microleakage degree score in PRG Barrier Coat group were higher than those in 350XT flowing resin group and Beautifil Flow Plus F00 group（P<0.05）；the microleakage degrees and the microleakage degree scores in gingival walls in various groups were higher than those of occlusal walls of the same material （P<0.05）.In the experiment with saliva，there were no differences in the microleakage eakage degrees and the microleakage degree scores among various groups（P>0.05）；the microleakage degrees and the microleakage degree scores in each group with saliva were higher than those of the same material without saliva （P<0.05）.

Conclusion

As materials for filling class Ⅴ cavities， Z350XT flowing resin and Beautifil Flow Plus F00 are superior to PRG Barrier Coat and GIC. It should be widely promoted in clinical practice. Prevention of saliva contamination is critical to reducing microleakage.

Key words: Flowable materials, Class Ⅴ cavity, Microleakage, Z350XT flowing resin, Beautifil Flow Plus F00, PRG Barrier Coat

CLC Number:

R783.1

Wentao GENG,Jinfang XIE,Yingli ZHANG,Xia LIU,Shuo YIN. Occurrence and influence factors of microleakage in classⅤcavities filled with three different flowing materials in vitro[J].Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2022, 48(1): 59-64.

Figures/Tables 5

Tab. 1

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Tab.5

References 20

1	LAI Z Y， ZHI Q H， ZHOU Y， et al. Prevalence of non-carious cervical lesions and associated risk indicators in middle-aged and elderly populations in Southern China［J］. Chin J Dent Res， 2015， 18（1）： 41-50.
2	KRÄMER N， SCHMIDT M， LÜCKER S， et al. Glass ionomer cement inhibits secondary caries in an in vitro biofilm model［J］. Clin Oral Investig， 2018， 22（2）： 1019-1031.
3	MACHADO A C， SOARES C J， REIS B R， et al. Stress‑strain analysis of premolars with non‑carious cervical lesions： influence of restorative material， loading direction and mechanical fatigue ［J］. Oper Dent， 2017， 42（3）： 253‑265.
4	WOOD I， JAWAD Z， PAISLEY C， et al. Non-carious cervical tooth surface loss： a literature review［J］. J Dent， 2008， 36（10）： 759-766.
5	BALOS S， PILIĆ B， PETRONIJEVIĆ B， et al. Improving mechanical properties of flowable dental composite resin by adding silica nanoparticles［J］. Vojnosanit Pregl， 2013， 70（5）： 477-483.
6	薛诗京，白宇宏，刘彤，等. 树脂直接修复后边缘密合性的影响因素分析［J］. 口腔材料器械杂志， 2018， 27（2）： 70-74.
7	KUMAR U， DHARMANI C K K， SINGH S， et al. Effect of air abrasion preconditioning on microleakage in class Ⅴ restorations under cyclic loading： an in vitro study［J］. J Clin Diagn Res， 2014， 8（5）： ZC29-ZC32.
8	BOLLU I P， HARI A， THUMU J， et al. Comparative evaluation of microleakage between nano-ionomer， giomer and resin modified glass ionomer cement in class Ⅴ cavities-CLSM study［J］.J Clin Diagn Res，2016， 10（5）： ZC66-ZC70.
9	GUO J W， HOLMES B， YANG B， et al. Determining the temporal development of dentin-composite bond strength during curing［J］. Dent Mater， 2016， 32（8）： 1007-1018.
10	靳凯璐，马哲，李涛，等. 空气喷磨结合酸蚀对预防性树脂充填后微渗漏的影响［J］. 牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志， 2018， 28（2）： 78-82.
11	GONZÁLEZ LÓPEZ S， SANZ CHINESTA M V， CEBALLOS GARCÍA L， et al. Influence of cavity type and size of composite restorations on cuspal flexure［J］. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal， 2006， 11（6）： E536-E540.
12	SALERNO M， DERCHI G， THORAT S， et al. Surface morphology and mechanical properties of new-generation flowable resin composites for dental restoration［J］. Dent Mater， 2011， 27（12）： 1221-1228.
13	姚媚，陈勇，陆红艳. 不同材料修复牙楔状缺损对其边缘密合度的影响比较［J］. 中国基层医药， 2019， 26（2）： 202-204.
14	卢晓慧. 不同材料治疗牙齿楔状缺损的临床效果观察［J］. 南通大学学报（医学版），2020，40（2）：193-194.
15	NOMURA R， MORITA Y， MATAYOSHI S， et al. Inhibitory effect of surface pre-reacted glass-ionomer （S-PRG） eluate against adhesion and colonization by Streptococcus mutans［J］. Sci Rep， 2018， 8（1）： 5056.
16	田洪琰，于鹏，袁重阳，等. 树脂基覆膜材料对牙根面保护作用的耐久性［J］. 北京大学学报（医学版）， 2016， 48（5）： 889-893.
17	YAMAMOTO S， SAYED M， TAKAHASHI M，et al. Effects of a surface prereacted glass-ionomer filler coating material on biofilm formation and inhibition of dentin demineralization［J］. Clin Oral Investig， 2021， 25（2）： 683-690.
18	杨文丽，郭雨，甘抗.通用型粘接剂涂布方式对Ⅴ类洞充填体边缘微渗漏的影响［J］.中华老年口腔医学杂志，2019， 17（6）：340-344.
19	BIN-SHUWAISH M， ALHUSSAINI A， ALHUDAITHY L， et al. Effects of different antibacterial disinfectants on microleakage of bulk-fill composite bonded to different tooth structures［J］. BMC Oral Health， 2021， 21（1）： 348.
20	李蓉，左恩俊. 排龈技术的应用方案及热点聚焦［J］. 中国组织工程研究， 2021， 25（2）： 322-328.

Group	Degree of microleakage
Group	Occlusal wall	Gingival wall
3M Z350XT
Without saliva	0.585±0.518^*	1.333±0.243^*▲
With saliva	1.860±0.475^○	2.713±0.312^○▲
Beautifil Flow Plus F00
Without saliva	0.730±0.398^*	1.323±0.250^*▲
With saliva	1.667±0.215^○	2.483±0.415^○▲
PRG Barrier Coat
Without saliva	1.152±0.739^*?	1.953±0.094 ^*?#▲
With saliva	1.887±0.228^○	2.838±0.542^○▲
GIC
Without saliva	1.990±0.321	2.680±0.222^#▲

Group	Microleakage degree score				χ²	P
Group	0	1	2	3	χ²	P
Z350XT	2（33.3）	3（50）	1（16.7）	0（0.0）	11.701	<0.05
Beautifil Flow Plus F00	1（16.7）	4（66.7）	1（16.7）	0（0.0）
PRG Barrier Coat	1（16.7）	2（33.3）	3（50.0 ）	0（0.0）
GIC	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	3（50.0 ）	3（50.0）

Group	Microleakage degree score				χ²	P
Group	0	1	2	3	χ²	P
Z350XT	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	6（100.0）	0（0.0）	16.620	<0.05
Beautifil Flow Plus F00	0（0.0）	1（16.7）	5（50.0）	0（0.0）
PRG Barrier Coat	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	4（66.7）	2（33.3）
GIC	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	6（100.0）

Group	Microleakage degree score				χ²	P
Group	0	1	2	3	χ²	P
Z350XT	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	4（66.7）	2（33.3）	0.523	0.770
Beautifil Flow Plus F00	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	5（83.3）	1（16.7）
PRG Barrier Coat	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	4（66.7）	2（33.3）

Group	Microleakage degree score				χ²	P
Group	0	1	2	3	χ²	P
Z350XT	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	6（100.0）	0.000	1.000
Beautifil Flow Plus F00	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	6（100.0）
PRG Barrier Coat	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	0（0.0）	6（100.0）

Occurrence and influence factors of microleakage in classⅤcavities filled with three different flowing materials in vitro

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 5

References 20

Related Articles 3

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	ZHAO Mengming, ZHANG Xin, WANG Feifei, LI Rui, LIU Dayong, HU Meilin, JIA Zhi. Comparison of marginal closure effects among 4 kinds of resinmaterials in filling simulated Ⅴ-type cavity of permanent malars in vitro [J]. Journal of Jilin University(Medicine Edition), 2020, 46(02): 389-393.
[2]	HE Xi, LI Jiang, ZHANG Yan, GE Yan, CHEN Zhen-yu, LI Xiao-ju, ZHANG Feng-lan, . Influence of different cements and margin designs on marginal microleakage in metal crowns [J]. J4, 2012, 38(4): 766-769.
[3]	ZHU Zhen, LIU Zhi-Hui, WANG Li-Quan, GONG Chun-Yan. Contrast study of \|microleakage incidence and extent of \|collocation uses of several clinical and frequently used cements and dowel materials [J]. J4, 2011, 37(1): 142-146.