Annapoorna Kini, Kavana M G, Shubhashini N, Nithin Shetty, Venkata Suresh Venkataiah, Mohammad Fareed, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari
{"title":"用激光共聚焦扫描显微镜比较评价四种修复材料的微渗漏:体外研究。","authors":"Annapoorna Kini, Kavana M G, Shubhashini N, Nithin Shetty, Venkata Suresh Venkataiah, Mohammad Fareed, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari","doi":"10.1007/s11845-025-03927-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Understanding the sealing ability of restorative materials to prevent microleakage and its consequent complications-such as secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, and restoration failure-is imperative in clinical dentistry. This study aims to compare the microleakage performance of four restorative materials-bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto), alkasite restorative (Cention N), compomer (Dyract Flow), and glass ionomer cement (Type 2 GIC)-in Class V cavities of extracted premolar teeth.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty non-carious, intact premolar teeth were selected and prepared with standardized Class V cavities. The teeth were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 10) and restored with the respective materials. The restorations underwent thermocycling, followed by microleakage testing using rhodamine dye. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), a technique that provides superior depth resolution and three-dimensional visualization of microleakage, was used to assess dye penetration at the tooth-restoration interface. Microleakage was then scored using a standardized grading system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences in microleakage were observed among the groups (χ<sup>2</sup> = 45.69; p < 0.001). Group 1 (bioactive composite resin) demonstrated the lowest microleakage, with predominantly Grade 0 and Grade 1 scores, while Group 4 (GIC) exhibited the highest microleakage, characterized mainly by Grade 3 scores. Bioactive composite resin exhibited significantly lower microleakage than alkasite, compomer, and GIC (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed between alkasite and compomer.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto) provided the most effective seal against microleakage, followed by alkasite and compomer, with glass ionomer cement showing the least effective sealing properties.</p>","PeriodicalId":14507,"journal":{"name":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of microleakage of four restorative materials using confocal laser scanning microscopy: an in vitro study.\",\"authors\":\"Annapoorna Kini, Kavana M G, Shubhashini N, Nithin Shetty, Venkata Suresh Venkataiah, Mohammad Fareed, Mohmed Isaqali Karobari\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11845-025-03927-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Understanding the sealing ability of restorative materials to prevent microleakage and its consequent complications-such as secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, and restoration failure-is imperative in clinical dentistry. This study aims to compare the microleakage performance of four restorative materials-bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto), alkasite restorative (Cention N), compomer (Dyract Flow), and glass ionomer cement (Type 2 GIC)-in Class V cavities of extracted premolar teeth.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Forty non-carious, intact premolar teeth were selected and prepared with standardized Class V cavities. The teeth were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 10) and restored with the respective materials. The restorations underwent thermocycling, followed by microleakage testing using rhodamine dye. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), a technique that provides superior depth resolution and three-dimensional visualization of microleakage, was used to assess dye penetration at the tooth-restoration interface. Microleakage was then scored using a standardized grading system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Significant differences in microleakage were observed among the groups (χ<sup>2</sup> = 45.69; p < 0.001). Group 1 (bioactive composite resin) demonstrated the lowest microleakage, with predominantly Grade 0 and Grade 1 scores, while Group 4 (GIC) exhibited the highest microleakage, characterized mainly by Grade 3 scores. Bioactive composite resin exhibited significantly lower microleakage than alkasite, compomer, and GIC (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed between alkasite and compomer.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto) provided the most effective seal against microleakage, followed by alkasite and compomer, with glass ionomer cement showing the least effective sealing properties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14507,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Irish Journal of Medical Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Irish Journal of Medical Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-025-03927-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Journal of Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-025-03927-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of microleakage of four restorative materials using confocal laser scanning microscopy: an in vitro study.
Objective: Understanding the sealing ability of restorative materials to prevent microleakage and its consequent complications-such as secondary caries, postoperative sensitivity, and restoration failure-is imperative in clinical dentistry. This study aims to compare the microleakage performance of four restorative materials-bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto), alkasite restorative (Cention N), compomer (Dyract Flow), and glass ionomer cement (Type 2 GIC)-in Class V cavities of extracted premolar teeth.
Materials and methods: Forty non-carious, intact premolar teeth were selected and prepared with standardized Class V cavities. The teeth were randomly assigned to one of four groups (n = 10) and restored with the respective materials. The restorations underwent thermocycling, followed by microleakage testing using rhodamine dye. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), a technique that provides superior depth resolution and three-dimensional visualization of microleakage, was used to assess dye penetration at the tooth-restoration interface. Microleakage was then scored using a standardized grading system.
Results: Significant differences in microleakage were observed among the groups (χ2 = 45.69; p < 0.001). Group 1 (bioactive composite resin) demonstrated the lowest microleakage, with predominantly Grade 0 and Grade 1 scores, while Group 4 (GIC) exhibited the highest microleakage, characterized mainly by Grade 3 scores. Bioactive composite resin exhibited significantly lower microleakage than alkasite, compomer, and GIC (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed between alkasite and compomer.
Conclusions: Bioactive composite resin (Activa Pronto) provided the most effective seal against microleakage, followed by alkasite and compomer, with glass ionomer cement showing the least effective sealing properties.
期刊介绍:
The Irish Journal of Medical Science is the official organ of the Royal Academy of Medicine in Ireland. Established in 1832, this quarterly journal is a contribution to medical science and an ideal forum for the younger medical/scientific professional to enter world literature and an ideal launching platform now, as in the past, for many a young research worker.
The primary role of both the Academy and IJMS is that of providing a forum for the exchange of scientific information and to promote academic discussion, so essential to scientific progress.