The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2007 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Gap Formation between Different Cavity Walls and Resin Composite Systems on Primary and Permanent Teeth

Ozlem Tulunoglu, Asli Evren Ulker

Citation Information : Tulunoglu O, Ulker AE. Gap Formation between Different Cavity Walls and Resin Composite Systems on Primary and Permanent Teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007; 8 (2):60-69.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-8-2-60

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-02-2007

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2007; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of five self-etching and etch-rinse dentin-bonding agents in achieving a gap-free adaptation between the restorative material and the dentin in primary and permanent teeth.

Methods and Materials

Gaps located at the restoration dentin interface were evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

Results

There were more gaps on the corner of the cavities, but no significant difference was detected between different cavity walls (p>0,05). Statistical results of the SEM analysis revealed fewer gaps in the restorations made with self-etching dentin bonding agents than etch-rinse agents at the restoration-dentin interface in both primary and permanent teeth.

Conclusion

Self-etching bonding systems were preferable in primary and permanent teeth according to the results of this study. However, further studies should be conducted to determine a favorable strategy to eliminate the gaps on the corners of cavities and maintain a gap-free adaptation between resin composite and tooth structure.

Citation

Tulunoglu O, Ulker AE. Gap Formation between Different Cavity Walls and Resin Composite Systems on Primary and Permanent Teeth. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007 February;(8)2:060-069.


PDF Share
  1. Current developments in composite materials and techniques. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1996 Sep;8(7):603-13; quiz 614.
  2. Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in Class II resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent 1998;26(7):555-62.
  3. A TEM study of two water-based adhesive systems bonded to dry and wet dentin. J Dent Res 1998 Jan;77(1):50-9.
  4. The effect of collagen removal and the use of a low-viscosity resin liner on marginal adaptation of resin composite restorations with margins in dentin. Oper Dent 2003 Jul-Aug;28(4):378-87.
  5. Bonding to enamel and dentin: a brief history and state of the art. Quintescence Int 1995 Feb;26(2):95-110.
  6. Comparative in vivo and in vitro investigation of interfacial bond variability. Oper Dent 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):3-11.
  7. Bonding to ground dentin by a phenyl-P self-etching primer. J Dent Res 1994 Jun;73(6):1212-20.
  8. Tensile bond strength of a newly developed one-bottle self-etching resin bonding system to various dental substrates. Dent in Japan 2000;36:47-53.
  9. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching systems. Part I: Depth of penetration beyond dentin smear layers. Dent Mater 2001 Jul;17(4):296-308.
  10. Acid conditioning and hybridization of substrates. In:Nakabayashi N, Pashley DH (eds) Hybridization of dental hard tissues. Quintessence Publishing Co Tokyo 1998:39-44.
  11. Bond strengths and SEM evaluation of Clearfil Liner Bond II. Am J Dent 1995;8 (6) 289-293.
  12. Tensile bond strength and SEM evaluation of ground and intact enamel surfaces. J Dent 1999 Sep;27(7):523-30.
  13. Dentin bonding: SEM comparison of the dentin surface in primary and permanent teeth. Pediatr Dent 1997 May-Jun;19(4):246-52.
  14. Effect of delayed polishing periods on interfacial gap formation of Class V restorations. Oper Dent 2003 Sep-Oct;28(5):552-9.
  15. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymerbased restoratives. J Dent 1997 Nov;25(6):435-40.
  16. Outline and arrangement of enamel rods in human deciduous and permanent enamel 3D-recontructions obtained from CLSM and SEM images based on serial ground sections. Eur J Oral Sci 2001;Dec 109(6): 409-414.
  17. Comparison of primary and permanent teeth. In: Johnsen DC (ed) Oral development and histology. BC Decker Philadelphia 1987:180-190.
  18. The effect of acid etching times on ground primary enamel. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1991 Spring;15(3):188-94.
  19. Determinants of in vitro gap formation of resin composites J Dent 2004 Feb;32(2):109-15.
  20. Quality and durability of marginal adaptation in bonded composite restorations. Dent Mater 1991 Apr;7(2):107-13.
  21. Interfacial micro morphological differences in hybrid layer formation between water-and solvent-based dentin bonding systems. J Prosthet Dent 2002 Jun;87(6):633-41.
  22. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent 1998 Jan;26(1):1-20.
  23. Moist versus dry dentin: its effect on shear bond strength. Am J Dent 1992 Jun;5(3):127-29.
  24. Effect of composition and complexity of dentinbonding agents on operator variability-analysis of gap formation using confocal microscopy. Eur J Oral Sci 2003 Dec;111(6):523-8.
  25. Creating a reliable bond. An all-in-one system. Am J Dent 2000;13(special issue):85D-87D.
  26. Three-dimensional evaluation of gap formation of cervical restorations. J Dent 2005 Apr;33(4):325-33.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.