gluma and prisma-fil

Previous studies have shown that dentine adhesives reduce or eliminate contraction gaps in composite restorations. This study examined the relationship between cavity site and contraction gaps when two dentine adhesives were used in combination with two composites. One hundred and fifty-two cavities, each measuring 2.0 mm diameter and 1.5 mm depth, were prepared on side surfaces of extracted teeth, with each surface classified into three levels: upper, middle and lower. The dentine adhesives and composites were randomly assigned to the cavities. Four pre-determined, diametrical measurements of contraction gaps were made for each restored cavity using a Nikon Measurescope. Measurements yielded overall mean contraction gaps of 0.229, 0.262, and 0.260 for upper, middle and lower levels on the crown; the differences between means were not statistically significant. Type of dentine adhesives and composites influenced the size of contraction gaps rather than cavity site.

Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Bonding; Dental Cavity Preparation; Dental Cements; Dental Leakage; Dentin; Glutaral; Humans; Polymethacrylic Acids; Resin Cements

Bonding to dentin with long-term success has been a quest of dentistry for some time. Microleakage is a major problem that can lead to staining and discolorization of the restoration and postoperative sensitivity. Some of the newer dentin bonding systems include Gluma Bond and Scotchbond 2. A glass ionomer/composite "sandwich" technique has also been advocated for dentin bonding. Here a glass ionomer is first bonded to the dentin, bonding agent is applied to the glass ionomer and a composite restoration is then placed into the cavity preparation. The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of Gluma Bond, Scotchbond 2, the glass ionomer/composite sandwich technique along with a positive and negative control. This was accomplished, in vitro, using extracted human teeth and a Ca45 radioisotope technique. The teeth were examined for microleakage at periods of 1 week, 6 months and 12 months. The results of this study indicate that, in vitro, the glass ionomer sandwich technique does not stop microleakage. The results also indicate that, in vitro, Gluma Bond and especially Scotchbond 2 restorations can resist microleakage for short periods of time. However, at the end of the 12 months, all Gluma Bond and Scotchbond 2 specimens exhibited gross microleakage.

Topics: Adhesives; Composite Resins; Dental Bonding; Dental Cements; Dental Leakage; Dentin; Glass Ionomer Cements; Glutaral; Humans; Maleates; Polymethacrylic Acids; Resin Cements

Class V abrasion and erosion lesions restored with composite resin seem to be more susceptible to microleakage, because the gingival margin is usually placed in cementum and/or dentin. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microleakage, in vitro, of two new dentinal bonding systems along with a positive and negative control. This study was accomplished using extracted human teeth and a calcium-45 radioisotope technique. The teeth were examined for microleakage at periods of 1 week, 6 months, and 1 year. The results at all time intervals indicated that the cavities restored with the new bonding agents and their respective composite resins leaked more than did the negative control, glass-ionomer cement.

Topics: Composite Resins; Dental Bonding; Dental Cements; Dental Leakage; Dentin; Glass Ionomer Cements; Glutaral; Humans; Maleates; Polymethacrylic Acids; Tooth Abrasion; Tooth Erosion