Marginal sealing ability of four restorative materials placed in root surfaces.
The sealing ability of four restorative materials, placed in root surface cavities, was assessed by a range of standard in vitro microleakage tests. The rank order of the severity of microleakage associated with the four materials varied with the different tests. Although differences between the performance of unlined amalgam, two different dentine-bonded composites and a glass-ionomer restorative material were detected, most were not statistically significant. None of the materials tested completely eliminated microleakage and so even those materials reported to be adhesive to dentine cannot be considered ideal in the restoration of root surface cavities.
Chan
M F
MF
University of Liverpool, Dental Hospital, UK.
Jones
J C
JC
D003188:Composite Resins; D003723:Dental Amalgam; D003738:Dental Cements; D003763:Dental Leakage; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D005976:Glutaral; D006801:Humans; D008298:Maleates; D008689:Methacrylates; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; D011140:Polyurethanes; D017213:Root Caries / Q000628:therapy; D014092:Tooth Root
D003188:Composite Resins; D003738:Dental Cements; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D008298:Maleates; D008689:Methacrylates; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; D011140:Polyurethanes; C069300:Tripton resin; C029824:urethane dimethacrylate luting resin; C076985:Pekalux; D003723:Dental Amalgam; C040964:Ketac-Fil; C044372:Gluma; D005976:Glutaral