Contemporary Clinical Dentistry
   
  Home | About us | Editorial board | Search
Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Advertise
Instructions | Online submission| Contact us | Subscribe |

 

Login  | Users Online: 1209  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 9-14

Comparative evaluation of microleakage in class II cavities restored with Ceram X and Filtek P-90: An in vitro study


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, J.N. Kapoor D.A.V. (C) Dental College, Yamunanagar, Haryana, India

Correspondence Address:
Poonam Bogra
House no. 459/1, Puran Vihar, Jagadhri, Haryana - 135 003
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.94539

Rights and Permissions

Context: Polymerization shrinkage in composite resins is responsible for microleakage. Methacrylate-based composite resins have linear reactive groups resulting in high polymerization shrinkage. A recently introduced composite resin Filtek P90 is based on siloxanes and oxiranes which polymerize by cationic "ring opening" polymerization resulting in reduced polymerization shrinkage. Objectives: Aim of this study was to compare microleakage in class II cavities restored with a nanoceramic restorative (Ceram X) and a silorane composite (Filtek P90). Materials and Methods: Standardized class II box type cavities were prepared on mesial (Groups Ia and IIa) and distal (Groups Ib and IIb) surfaces of twenty extracted permanent molar teeth with gingival floor ending 1 mm coronal and apical to the cementoenamel junction, respectively. The teeth in Group Ia and Ib were restored with Ceram X and Group IIa and IIb with Filtek P90. The specimens were thermocycled and microleakage evaluated. Statistical Analysis Used: The data were statistically analyzed using Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test at the 0.05 level of significance. Results: Mean microleakage score of group la and lb was 1 ± 2.260 and 2.8 ± 1.229, respectively. And that of group Ila and llb was 0.2 ± .869 and 0.3 ± .588, respectively. When groups I and II were compared, results were statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion: It was concluded that silorane-based composite may be a better substitute for methacrylate-based composites.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed6156    
    Printed179    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded584    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 14    

Recommend this journal