主催: The Japanese Society for Dental Materials and Devices
Introduction: Cervical sealing should be an important factor for good outcomes of Class II resin restoration. At cervical areas, dentinal tubules run horizontally, meaning that open dentinal tubules may easily remain and cause leakages, and, in addition, margins may locate on cementum. Thus, tight sealing is sometimes not so easy at cervical margin areas. Because shrinkage of cured composite resin (CR) is the main cause of microleakages, the thin layer of resin cement for resin inlay may cause less microleakage. It is shown that saliva disturbs the adhesion of resin. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cervical margin microleakage of resin cement layers of class II CR inlay restorations with and without saliva contamination. Materials and Methods: Crown portions of 20 extracted teeth were cut off at near enamel-cementum junction to simulate cervical margins of Class II. Panavia F2.0 and Linkmax resin cements were used to cement with Clearfil AP-X CR resin bodies according to the manufacturer's recommendations with and without saliva contamination (a total of four groups: n=5 each), after the cut surfaces were irrigated with 12% EDTA pH 7.0. After dipped in 0.5 mg/ml safranin-O/ propylene glycol for 24 hours at 37degree Celcius, the sample teeth were cut into two pieces in mesio-distal plan, and dye penetration was evaluated using a stereomicroscope (Nikon, Japan). Results and Discussion: No cases using Panavia and Linkmax were observed to have dye penetration unless saliva contaminated. However, saliva affected the tight sealing, because 3 teeth out 5 had leakages when intentional saliva contamination was given at the time adhesion, indicating resin inlays with resin cement would give good sealing even at the cervical margins. More considerations may be needed for actual practice under clinical conditions. Conclusions: Tight sealing, even at cervical margin areas of class II restoration using resin inlay cemented by resin cement, could be obtained.
