These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Effect of placement techniques on the marginal adaptation of Class V composite restorations.
    Author: Sensi LG, Marson FC, Baratieri LN, Monteiro Junior S.
    Journal: J Contemp Dent Pract; 2005 Nov 15; 6(4):17-25. PubMed ID: 16299603.
    Abstract:
    STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: Several techniques are proposed for the restoration of Class V cavities but there is no agreement in the literature as to which technique is more effective. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of different techniques of composite increment placement on the marginal adaptation of Class V restorations. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four human molars were selected and prepared with standardized saucer-shaped cavity dimensions of 3.0 mm (occlusal-gingival), 2.0 mm (mesial-distal), and 2.0 mm (depth). The margins are in reference to the cemento-enamel junction with 1.5 mm being located on enamel and 1.5 mm on dentin. The cavities were randomly assigned into three groups (n=8) and restored with composites as follows: Group 1, the occlusal increment was placed and cured first followed by the gingival increment; Group 2, the gingival increment was placed and cured first followed by the occlusal increment; and Group 3, the cavities were restored with one bulk increment. Restorations were immediately finished and stored for 24 h in tap water. Specimens were subjected to thermocycling (1000 cycles, 5 degrees C to 55 degrees C, 30 s dwell time) and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin solution for 24 h in room temperature. After rinsing with running water, the restorations were sectioned longitudinally and enamel and dentin margins were evaluated and scored according to the microleakage on a 0-3 scale. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis test at p<0.05. RESULTS: Median of microleakage scores for all evaluated groups was zero. No statistical difference was observed among the three groups both in enamel (p = 0.5929) and dentin (p = 0.3679) margins CONCLUSION: The placement technique did not influence the marginal adaptation of moderate Class V restorations. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: No differences on marginal adaptation were observed when restoring conservative Class V cavities using incremental or bulk placement techniques.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]