Comparative evaluation of microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composite restorations in class v cavity preparation: an in-vitro study
S. Kumar, V. Krishnan, K. Jyothi, P. Venugopal, .P SharathKumar, S. Girish, Melwin
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composite restorations in class v cavity preparation: an in-vitro study","authors":"S. Kumar, V. Krishnan, K. Jyothi, P. Venugopal, .P SharathKumar, S. Girish, Melwin","doi":"10.18231/2278-3784.2018.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim and Objective: Was to assess and compare the microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composites in class V cavities along the occlusal and gingival margins using dye penetration test under stereomicroscope.\nMaterials and Methods: Seventy five human extracted premolars were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=25), as per the restorative materials for microleakage test. Group I: Tetric Evo Ceram (Bulk fill non flowable). Group II: G-aenial Universal Flo (Highly filled flowable resin composite). Group III: Smart Dentin Replacement (Bulk fill flowable resin composite). Class V (box) cavities were prepared both on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each of the 75 teeth, a total of 150 cavities, restored, immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and then sectioned bucco lingually into two halves. Dye penetration score was measured along occlusal and gingival wall using a Stereomicroscope at 40X magnification. Statistical analysis was done using Chi square test for microleakage assessment. P value was set at E‚0.05.\nResult: Intergroup comparison showed statistically no significant difference between the three groups both occlusal and gingival wall, whereas groupwise comparison showed statistically significant result between group I and Group II at gingival wall with P value 0.021.\nConclusion: None of three resin composite materials were free from microleakage. All the three materials showed more microleakage at gingival wall compared to occlusal wall. Among all the tested groups G-aenial Universal Flo showed the least microleakage at the gingival wall.\n\nKeyword: Microleakage, Class V, Resin composites.","PeriodicalId":383292,"journal":{"name":"International Dental Journal of Student's Research","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Dental Journal of Student's Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18231/2278-3784.2018.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Aim and Objective: Was to assess and compare the microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composites in class V cavities along the occlusal and gingival margins using dye penetration test under stereomicroscope.
Materials and Methods: Seventy five human extracted premolars were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=25), as per the restorative materials for microleakage test. Group I: Tetric Evo Ceram (Bulk fill non flowable). Group II: G-aenial Universal Flo (Highly filled flowable resin composite). Group III: Smart Dentin Replacement (Bulk fill flowable resin composite). Class V (box) cavities were prepared both on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each of the 75 teeth, a total of 150 cavities, restored, immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and then sectioned bucco lingually into two halves. Dye penetration score was measured along occlusal and gingival wall using a Stereomicroscope at 40X magnification. Statistical analysis was done using Chi square test for microleakage assessment. P value was set at E‚0.05.
Result: Intergroup comparison showed statistically no significant difference between the three groups both occlusal and gingival wall, whereas groupwise comparison showed statistically significant result between group I and Group II at gingival wall with P value 0.021.
Conclusion: None of three resin composite materials were free from microleakage. All the three materials showed more microleakage at gingival wall compared to occlusal wall. Among all the tested groups G-aenial Universal Flo showed the least microleakage at the gingival wall.
Keyword: Microleakage, Class V, Resin composites.