Microleakage Research Paper

3085 Words13 Pages
INTRODUCTION Microleakage has been a key issue in the field of operative dentistry1, but it is not long since it has drawn the attention of orthodontists. From the orthodontic point of view, microleakage is an important factor in the development of two iatrogenic lesions particularly at the adhesive - enamel interface: white spot lesions and decalcification. The presence of fixed orthodontic appliances impedes oral hygiene and facilitates plaque accumulation. This in turn increases the bacterial counts in the plaque around the attachments and the production of organic acids2. In the presence of a low pH in the oral environment, the calcium and phosphate ions diffuse out of enamel resulting in demineralization and white spot lesions3.…show more content…
1. Conventional Glass Ionomer cement: Ketac-Cem (3M ESPE, Germay)
2. Resin-modified Glass Ionomer cement: GC Fuji Orthoband (Japan)
3. Polyacid - modified Composite cement: Ultra Band-lok (Reliance Orthodontics, USA)

3. Bands Two types of contoured pre-formed bands for premolars were used in the study. Conventional band: Classic orthodontics (USA) Microetched band: Classic orthodontics (USA)

METHODS
Before banding, all the teeth were disinfected in 1% thymol solution for one week, and then stored in distilled water for rest of the experiment. The extracted teeth were randomly divided in to six experimental groups based on the combination between two types of bands and three different band cements as following.

Sl.no Groups Type of Band Type of Cement No. of teeth
1. I Conventional band Conventional Glass Ionomer cement 15
2. II Microetched band Conventional Glass Ionomer cement 15
3. III Conventional band Resin-modified Glass Ionomer cement 15
4. IV Microetched band Resin-modified Glass Ionomer cement 15
5. V Conventional band Polyacid - modified Composite cement 15
6. VI Microetched band Polyacid - modified Composite cement
…show more content…
Lingual side The descriptive statistics (Mean, Median, Standard Deviation, 95%Cl) and the inter-group comparisons based on three types of cements and two types of bands, for the microleakage on buccal and lingual surfaces are presented in Table 2 and graph 1.

For conventional bands, GIC showed the mean microleakage of 7.87 ± 4.10 mm on buccal side and 6.43 ± 3.29 mm on lingual side. Even Poly acid modified composite showed higher microleakage on the buccal than the lingual sides (5.10 ± 4.34 vs 3.87 ± 4.03 mm). However, RMGIC showed comparable scores for both the sides (2.83 vs 2.89 mm).

For microetched bands, GIC showed higher microleakage on the buccal side than the lingual side (3.43 vs. 2.42), but the reverse was true for both RMGIC and PAMC (2.67vs. 3.57, and 2.20 vs. 3.07,

More about Microleakage Research Paper

Open Document