Do you want to publish a course? Click here

Comparative study of microleakage between nano and hybrid composite ( an in vitro study)

دراسة مقارنة مخبريّه بين الرّاتنج المركّب النّانومتري و الرّاتنج المركّب الهجين من حيث التسرّب الحفافي

959   0   13   0 ( 0 )
 Publication date 2016
and research's language is العربية
 Created by Shamra Editor




Ask ChatGPT about the research

The aim : This study aims to evaluate and compare the microleakage between nano and hybrid composite. Materials and Methods : the sample consisted of forty extracted premolars for orthodontics purposes , class v cavities were prepared with a specific dimensions on the buccal surface. The sample divided into two groups ; group A restored by nanocomposite ( Z350) , group B restored by hybrid composite ( Z250) , after that, the samples were placed in the incubator with thermo cycling for a month ,The samples were then immersed in 0.5 % methelyne blue dye for 24 hours , each tooth was mesial-distal sectioned vertically , finally, of all samples was studied using stereomicroscope to evaluated the microleakage . Results : there was no statistical significant difference between the nano and hybrid composite according to microleakage.

References used
BEUN,S; GLORIEUX,T; DEVAUXE,J; VREVEN,J; LELOUP,G. Characterization ofnanofilled compared to universal and microfilled composites. J Dent Mater. 2007 23(1):51-9
MITRA,S.B. Nanoparticles for Dental Materials: Synthesis, Analysis, and Application. In: Subramani K, Ahmed W, editors. Emerging Nanotechnologies in Dentistry Materials, Processes and Applications. Waltham, USA: Elsevier Inc. 2012. p. 15-3
NEELAKANTAN, P; JOHN,S; ANAND,S; SURESHBABU,N; SUBBARO,C. Fluo-ride release from a new glass-ionomer cement. Oper Dent. 2011;36(1):80-5
rate research

Read More

The research project sample consisted of 30 blocks of composite resin , these blocks where divided into three equal groups , 10 of composite resin Z-250 from 3M ESPE Company , 10 of the composite resin Supreme from 3M ESPE Company ,10 of the composit e resin Quixfil of Dentsply company, and has been testing the hardness Number, each sample individually. The aim of the previous procedures was to show the role of composite resin structure in determining the hardness number Through differences in the hardness number and the role of this hardness determining the mechanical properties for composite resin restorations cause of the importance of this property to understand the mechanical properties for a lot of restorative materials. And the result is that there is a statistically significant between the resin Quixfil and the Z-250 on the one hand and the Supreme resin on the other hand.
Regarding the sealing ability of restorative dental materials, this study was done to assess the microleakage of class V cavities restored with a new self-adhesive flowable composite resin and compare to different flowable materials.
Introduction :The demand for posterior aesthetic restorations has dramatically increased in recent years. Several new materials have been developed with improved aesthetic, adhesive and mechanical properties. Theoretically, nano-structured dental resin omposites are purported to have increased wear and hardness resistance compared with hybrid composites and may favor the achievement of restoratives with better long-term performance. Aim: The wear resistance of different types of resin composites were evaluated in the in vitro study. Material and methods :Two nanohybrid restorative composites -Tetric®EvoCeram (Ivoclar-Vivadent) and CeramXTM(Dentsply) - were compared with a microhybrid material - Tetric®Ceram (Ivoclar-Vivadent) and hybrid material Spectrom (Dentsply) . wear resistance : fifteen specimens (3x3 mm) of each material were subjected to wear tests . The data were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA(<=0.5). Results : The Tetric®EvoCeram composite resin exhibited significantly less wear than the CeramX and Tetric®Ceram material . Conclusions :In terms of wear resistance, nano-structured composites may perform either similarly or comparatively better than a microfilled and hyprid composite . nanohybrid restorative composites can thus be considered as a good restorative material.
This study aims to in vivo evaluate the direct microleakage, in class V composite restoration after isolation using the modified metal matrix or gingival retraction cord impregnated with Adrenaline. Materials and Methods: the research sample consiste d of 15 patients; each patient has two premolars at least prepared to be extracted for Orthodontic reasons in the same jaw. This sample divided into two groups according to the place, the right premolars group and the left premolars group, whether was upper or lower. Class V cavity was prepared with a specific dimensions on the buccal surface only, then isolated teeth of the first set by modified metal matrix while isolated teeth of the second set by a gingival retraction cord impregnated with Adrenaline. Teeth restored by composite resin, and then was extracted in the same meeting and studied the microleakage winning directly during restoration. .Results: there was statistical difference between the modified metal matrix and the gingival retraction cord impregnated with Adrenaline. Because modified metal matrix had achieved the lowest leakage rate.
Aim: to compare the apical sealing ability of three root canal sealers in human extracted teeth using dye penetration. Materials and Methods: thirty extracted human maxillary teeth were instrumented 1mm short of the anatomical apex and randomly as signed to three groups (n=10), according to the root canal sealer used for obturation. The teeth were divided into three experimental groups and obturated by cold lateral compaction of gutta-percha and one of the following sealers: group I, Zinc oxide and Eugenol sealer; group II, Adseal; group III, Apexit plus.The teeth were covered with nail varnish to within 2-3mm of the apical foramen and immersed in 2% methylene blue for 24 hours.After this period, the teeth were washed and cut longitudinally for apical leakage measurement inside the canal. Results: Statistical evaluation of the results showed no significant difference in the leakage between Adseal and Apexit plus (P =0.99). Leakage with ZOE was significantly lesser than Adseal (P=0.004) andApexit Plus (P=0.003). Conclusions:under the condition of this study, it can be concluded that ZOE presents lower apical leakage than Adseal and Apexit plus, and there was no significant difference in leakage between Adseal and Apexit plus.
comments
Fetching comments Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
mircosoft-partner

هل ترغب بارسال اشعارات عن اخر التحديثات في شمرا-اكاديميا