The objective of this study is to compare the coronal dye leakage of the interfaces between three types of temporary material against two brands of the restoration materials used as temporary wall and tooth structure.  A total of 94 human permanent lower molar teeth were prepared for class II cavity.  After that they were equally divided into two groups, 47 teeth each.  One greoup was assigned to be restored with Composite resin (Clearfil AP-X) and the other was restored with resin modified glass ionomer cement (Fuji II LC).  All of them were prepared for conventional access opening.  Each group was divided into two subgroups, 2 teeth for control group and the remaining for experimental group.  Experimental group was randomly allocated to three groups according to the type of temporary restoration, IRM, Caviton, and Fermit.  For the control group, the access opening was closed with cavit in one tooth and gutta percha in the remaining.  Then the teeth were submerged vertically in 3% methylene blue for 48 hr.  Finally, all teeth were sectioned mesiodistally and examined under measuring microscope.  The result showed that, when Caviton was used as temporary filling in case of using composite resin as temporary wall, 25% of sample was found at leakage level 0 while 75% at level 1.  When IRM and Fermit were used, there were more that 60% of samples leaked at level 3 which was statistically different (p<0.01).  When Fugi II LC was used, all of the samples were leaked at level 3.  The leakage of tooth interface and Caviton was found in the level 0(10%) and level 1 (90%) while the other groups were found in the level 3 (100%) which was statistically different (p<0.01).  From the experiment, it can conclude that Caviton gave the best seal not only when contact with tooth structure but when contact with composite resin wall. (suwwim@kku.ac.th)

Back to the Dental Materials: VIII - Others-Non-metallic Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 80th General Session (March 6-9, 2002)

Top Level Search