Keyur Joshi, Bhavna Dave, Niyanta Joshi, Bs Rajashekhara, Leena Hiren Jobanputra, Khushbu Yagnik
{"title":"两种不同的坑裂封闭剂和一种修复材料的微渗漏比较评价——体外研究。","authors":"Keyur Joshi, Bhavna Dave, Niyanta Joshi, Bs Rajashekhara, Leena Hiren Jobanputra, Khushbu Yagnik","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage.</p><p><strong>Materials & methods: </strong>Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group - I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of \"0\", \"1\", or \"2\" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials. How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.</p>","PeriodicalId":520673,"journal":{"name":"Journal of international oral health : JIOH","volume":" ","pages":"35-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780377/pdf/jioh-05-04-035.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study.\",\"authors\":\"Keyur Joshi, Bhavna Dave, Niyanta Joshi, Bs Rajashekhara, Leena Hiren Jobanputra, Khushbu Yagnik\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage.</p><p><strong>Materials & methods: </strong>Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group - I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of \\\"0\\\", \\\"1\\\", or \\\"2\\\" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials. How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520673,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of international oral health : JIOH\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"35-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780377/pdf/jioh-05-04-035.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of international oral health : JIOH\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/8/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of international oral health : JIOH","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:本研究的目的是研究和比较三种不同成分的坑缝密封剂,以检查其密封能力和微泄漏的有效性。材料与方法:收集治疗前磨牙120颗,无任何龋病、异常或形态多样性,平均分为三组(每组40颗)。组-I:复合基坑缝密封胶;组- ii:复合修复材料;组- iii:玻璃离子水门铁基坑缝密封胶。样品用浮石浆液清洗,用磷酸腐蚀剂蚀刻。牙齿彻底清洗和干燥后,用三种不同成分的密封剂进行处理和固化,然后热循环并浸泡在亚甲基蓝染料中24小时。然后观察牙齿并对微漏进行评分。对切片进行拍照,显示微漏评分为“0”、“1”或“2”,并采用非参数检验(Kruskal Walis检验)对数据进行统计分析。结果:复合材料作为密封材料,其微泄漏量明显小于玻璃水泥,与复合材料相比效果良好。结论:复合材料在口腔材料方面的发明、研究和纳米技术的实施,均优于玻璃Inomer Cement和复合材料。本文引自:Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K.两种不同牙槽和裂隙密封材料微渗漏的体外比较研究。国际口腔卫生杂志;2013;5(4): 35-39。
Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study.
Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage.
Materials & methods: Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group - I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of "0", "1", or "2" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test).
Results: Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer.
Conclusion: Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials. How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage - An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.