Evaluation of the microleakage of different class V cavities prepared by using Er:YAG laser, ultrasonic device, and conventional rotary instruments with two dentin bonding systems (an in vitro study)
- 21 January 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Lasers in Medical Science
- Vol. 30 (3), 969-975
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-014-1519-2
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the extent of microleakage in class V cavities prepared with bur, Er:YAG laser, and ultrasonic, hybridized with two different bonding agents (“Single bonding” solvent-free bonding agent and “Swiss TEC SL bond” alcohol-based solvent). Thirty freshly extracted human premolars were divided into three groups (n = 10), on each tooth, two cavities were prepared on the buccal and the lingual surfaces, and each group was subdivided into two subgroups (n = 5). Group 1: 20 cavities were prepared by using Er:YAG laser (500 mJ, 10 Hz, 63.69 J/cm2) (subgroup1a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 1b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Group 2: 20 cavities were prepared by using ultrasonic (subgroup 2a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 2b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Group 3: 20 cavities were prepared by using burs (subgroup 3a: Single bonding was used with 10 cavities; subgroup 3b: Swiss TEC SL bond was used with 10 cavities). Cavities were restored with a micro-hybrid composite resin. After thermocycling, the specimens were immersed in 2 % methylene blue solution for 4 h and then sectioned in the bucco-lingual direction. Dye penetration was scored based upon the extent of the dye using a stereomicroscope. The two-way ANOVA test and paired t-test revealed no statistically significant differences among the methods of preparation (conventional, laser, and ultrasonic). However, statistical differences were found between the adhesives tested: the “Single bonding”, which represented the solvent-free bonding agent, had lower microleakage values than “Swiss TEC SL bond”, which represented the alcohol-based bonding agent. Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that the Erbium:Yttrium-Aluminum Garnet (Er:YAG) laser and ultrasonic are as effective as the conventional method for preparing cavities and the extent of microleakage depends on the type of the bonding agents.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Resin composite—State of the artDental Materials, 2011
- Assessing microleakage of class V resin composite restorations after Er:YAG laser and bur preparationLasers in Surgery and Medicine, 2005
- A study on surface roughness and microleakage test in cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser irradiation and etched bur cavitiesLasers in Medical Science, 2003
- Assessing Microleakage on Class V Composite Resin Restorations after Er:YAG Laser Preparation Varying the Adhesive SystemsJournal of Clinical Laser Medicine & Surgery, 2002
- Morphological and Microleakage Studies of the Cavities Prepared by Er:YAG Laser Irradiation in Primary TeethJournal of Clinical Laser Medicine & Surgery, 2002
- Bonding to Er-YAG-laser-treated DentinJournal of Dental Research, 2002
- In vitro Evaluation of Five Alternative Methods of Carious Dentine ExcavationCaries Research, 2000
- Shear Strength of Composite Bonded to Er:YAG Laser-prepared DentinJournal of Dental Research, 1996
- Experimental studies of the application of the Er:YAG laser on dental hard substances: I. Measurement of the ablation rateLasers in Surgery and Medicine, 1989
- Microleakage : a reviewJournal of Dentistry, 1976