The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2020 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparative Evaluation of Mechanical and Microleakage Properties of Cention-N, Composite, and Glass Ionomer Cement Restorative Materials

Ramachandra Sujith, Tej G Yadav, Deepti Pitalia, Prashant Babaji, Kommula Apoorva, Ankita Sharma

Keywords : Cention-N, Glass ionomer cement, Hybrid composite, Properties

Citation Information : Sujith R, Yadav TG, Pitalia D, Babaji P, Apoorva K, Sharma A. Comparative Evaluation of Mechanical and Microleakage Properties of Cention-N, Composite, and Glass Ionomer Cement Restorative Materials. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (6):691-695.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2837

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 23-07-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim: The longevity of restorative materials depends on the resistance to masticatory forces. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the mechanical and microleakage properties of Cention-N with glass ionomer cement (GIC) and composite restorative materials. Materials and methods: A total of 45 specimen blocks were prepared with 15 samples of each type of restorative material, namely Cention-N, GIC, and hybrid composite. Samples were subjected to load at crosshead speed of 0.75 ± 0.25 mm/min till the fracture of sample. Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface of orthodontically extracted premolars followed by restoration of each test material. All the surfaces of the tooth were coated with clear nail varnish except 1 mm around the margins of the restorations. These samples were immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine dye and longitudinally sectioned and observed under stereomicroscope to check microleakage. The obtained data were statistically evaluated. Results: We found the highest mean compressive and flexural strength for hybrid composite followed by Cention-N and least for GIC which is statistically significant (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Mean microleakage was least for Cention-N. Cention-N is a newer restorative material having higher mechanical properties with lesser microleakage. Clinical significance: Cention-N is a newer restorative material having promising properties. This material can be used as an alternative restorative material.


PDF Share
  1. Mishra A, Singh G, Singh SK, et al. Comparative evaluation of mechanical properties of Cention N with conventionally used restorative materials—An in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2018;8(4):120–124.
  2. Sakaguchi R, Powers J. Craig's Restorative Dental Materials. 13th ed., Philadalphia; 2011.
  3. Meshram P, Meshram V, Palve D, et al. Comparative evaluation of microleakage around Class V cavities restored with alkasite restorative material with and without bonding agent and flowable composite resin: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2019;30(3): 403–407. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_767_17.
  4. Kaur M, Mann NS, Jhamb A, et al. A comparative evaluation of compressive strength of Cention N with glass Ionomer cement: An in-vitro study. Int J Appl Dent Sci 2019;5(1):05–09.
  5. Mazumdar P, Das A, Das UK. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three different direct restorative materials (silver amalgam, glass ionomer cement, Cention N), in Class II restorations using stereomicroscope: An in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res 2019;30(2): 277–281. DOI: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_481_17.
  6. Yazici AR, Baseren M, Dayangac B. The effect of flowable resin composite on microleakage in Class V cavities. Oper Dent 2003;28(1):42–46.
  7. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Composite restorations: Influence of flowable and self curing resin composite lining on microleakage in vitro. Oper Dent 2002;27(6):569–575.
  8. Mazumdar P, Das A, Guha C. Comparative evaluation of hardness of different restorative materials (restorative GIC, Cention N, nanohybrid composite resin and silver amalgam) –an in vitro study. Int J Adv Res 2018;6(3):826–832. DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/6737.
  9. Kumar KS, Ajitha P. Evaluation of compressive strength between Cention N and high copper amalgam - An in vitro study. Drug Invention Today 2019;12(2):255–257.
  10. Sadananda V, Shetty C, Hegde MN, et al. Alkasite restorative material: flexural and compressive strength evaluation. Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences 2018;9(5):2179–2182.
  11. Mazumdar P, Das A, Mandal D. Comparative evaluation of bond strength of composite resin & cention n to enamel and dentin with and without etching under universal testing machine. University J Dent Scie 2018;4(3):1–6.
  12. George P, Bhandary S. A comparative microleakage analysis of a newer restorative material – An ex vivo study. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS) 2018;17(12):56–60.
  13. Sahadev CK, Bharath MJ, Sandeep R, et al. An-invitro comparative evaluation of marginal microleakage of cention-n with bulk-fil SDR and zirconomer: a confocal microscopic study. Int J Sci Res 2018;7(7):635–638.
  14. Dodiya PV, Parekh V, Gupta MS, et al. Clinical evaluation of Cention–N and nano hybrid composite resin as a restoration of noncarious cervical lesion. J Dent Specialities 2019;7(1):3–5. DOI: 10.18231/j.jds.2019.001.
  15. Iftikhar N, Devashish, Srivastava B, et al. A comparative evaluation of mechanical properties of four different restorative materials: an in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2019;12(1):47–49. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1592.
  16. Sahu S, Ali N, Misuriya A, et al. Comparative evaluation of microleakage in class I cavities restored with amalgam, bulk-fill composite and Cention-N – An in vitro confocal laser scanning microscope study. Int J Oral Care Res 2018;6(1):S81–S85.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.