MICROLEAKAGE OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT INLAY ONLAY SYSTEMS

Citation
U. Hasanreisoglu et al., MICROLEAKAGE OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT INLAY ONLAY SYSTEMS, Journal of oral rehabilitation, 23(1), 1996, pp. 66-71
Citations number
12
Categorie Soggetti
Dentistry,Oral Surgery & Medicine
ISSN journal
0305182X
Volume
23
Issue
1
Year of publication
1996
Pages
66 - 71
Database
ISI
SICI code
0305-182X(1996)23:1<66:MODAII>2.0.ZU;2-7
Abstract
The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microleakage of direct and indirect inlay/onlay systems. Two of the groups investigat ed have indirect applications only and consist of microfine composites . The other two groups of inlay/onlay systems have both direct and ind irect applications and are hybrid composites. Standardized MOD prepara tions were cut in 60 extracted human premolars. One gingival margin wa s placed in enamel above the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and the othe r was placed in dentine below the CEJ. The inlays were made and luted according to each manufacturer's recommendation. The restored teeth we re thermocycled and immersed in a basic fuchsin solution for 24 h. Fol lowing the mesiodistal sectioning of the specimens, extent of dye pene tration at the restoration-glass ionomer cement and tooth-glass ionome r cement interfaces were scored using a stereomicroscope. Both direct and indirect inlays showed substantial leakage at gingival-dentine mar gins. However, there was only superficial leakage at enamel margins. C omparing the overall indirect inlay systems, EOS inlay leaked the most (P < 0.05). Indirect Brilliant Dentin(R) inlays showed a significantl y smaller amount of leakage than the other inlay systems. SRIsosit(R) and Estilux Posterior C VS(R) inlays provided a favourable marginal se al. In the case of Brilliant Dentin(R) and Estilux Posterior C VS(R), indirect inlays leaked more than direct inlays. Generally, no signific ant difference was observed between the interfaces evaluated in microl eakage performance.