Search

A vital feature of conservative dentistry is the adhesion of the restorative material to the tooth structure for restoration of the tooth substance lost due to dental decay, trauma, or dental imperfections. In a perfect world, a restorative material should generate a lasting adhesion by bonding the restoration with tooth tissues. The ingress of micro-organisms, oral fluids, molecules, and ions through microscopic spaces due to faulty adhesion between restoration and tooth structure is known as microleakage. This study is focuses on the evaluation of adhesive failures between the restorative materials. In the past, studies have focused more on the bonding potential of a restorative material with the tooth surface. Therefore, there is need to carry out a study that compares the microleakage between resin-based restorative materials in a sandwich manner with and without the intermediate bonding layer after immersion in 2% methylene blue dye at different time intervals. The restorative materials used were composite Ceram X Mono plus (DENTSPLY) and Z350 (3M ESPE), Vitremer resin modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) (3M ESPE), smart dentine replacement SDR (3M ESPE), Bond NT (DENTSPLY), and Universal Bond (3M ESPE). A light emitting diode (LED) was used to cure the specimens. Artificial saliva was used as a storage medium for the specimens. Thermocycling of specimens was carried out at 500 cycles/30 s and 1000 cycles/30 s. The world health organization (WHO) grading tool for microleakage was used to analyze fluid ingress in the specimens through disclosing by 2% methylene blue dye. The statistical analysis was carried out with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test, keeping the level of significance at p ≤ 0.05. In Grade 0 = 85 samples, Grade 1 = 10 samples, Grade 2 = 7 samples, Grade 3 = 16 samples, and in Grade 4 = 2 samples were identified. This study describes that no microleakage was observed in SDR and resin composite groups as compared to Vitremer and resin composite groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study aimed to evaluate if commonly used endodontic irrigants such as 3% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl, Prime Dental, Thane, India), 2% chlorhexidine (CHX, Sigma-Aldrich Co., St. Louis, MO, USA), and 17% ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA, Meta-Biomed Co. Ltd., Cheongju-si, South Korea) influenced the setting time and metal composition of different base endodontic sealers on exposure. AH Plus (Dentsply De Trey GmbH, Konstanz, Germany), Sealapex (SybronEndo, Orange, CA, USA), mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) Fillapex (Angelus Soluções Odontológicas, Londrina, Brazil), and Tubli-Seal (Kerr Dental, Orange, CA, USA) were selected as the different base representatives of endodontic sealers. These sealers were exposed to 3% NaOCl, 2% CHX, and 17% EDTA, and the individual setting time of the sealers was analyzed. The samples were analyzed for heavy metal elements such as chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As), mercury (Hg), lead (Pb), and beryllium (Be) by using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis. For statistical analysis, one-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey's tests were used. All selected sealers showed variation in setting time post-exposure to different irrigants. MTA Fillapex had the shortest mean setting time (215.7 min, post-exposure at 187.3 min) (p < 0.05). Mean setting time was also affected for AH Plus (479.6 min, post-exposure at 423.9 min) (p < 0.05) and Tubli-Seal (514.7 min, post-exposure at 465.2 min) (p < 0.05). Sealapex showed the maximum reduction of setting time (864.8 min, post-exposure at 673.4 min) (p < 0.05). All tested sealers showed heavy metals (Cr, Ni, Co, Cd, As, Hg, and Pb) in their composition, and the quantities were influenced by interaction with different irrigants. The heavy metal Be was not seen in any of the samples. Sealapex showed the longest setting time in comparison to other test sealers. Heavy metals were most present in Sealapex, followed by AH Plus, Tubli-Seal, and MTA Fillapex. MTA Fillapex was seen to have the shortest setting time, and heavy metal composition was least affected on interaction with different commonly used endodontic irrigants. Further, this study provides significant insight into the influence of different endodontic irrigants on interaction with different base endodontic sealers, which has not been reported previously, and future studies should emphasize endodontic irrigant-sealer interactions and their possible effects in the long run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]