Comparison of the marginal and axial wall integrity of in vivo and in vitro made adhesive class V restorations.
For several different procedures and material combinations adhesive Class V composite restorations were made under clinical and under laboratory conditions. Marginal discrepancy and gap formation at the floor of the cavity was recorded by way of SEM on replicas. Only weak correlation could be demonstrated between results obtained from in vivo and in vitro placed restorations. In general the hydrophobic resinous bonding systems performed better under laboratory conditions while the hydrophilic glass ionomer lining led to a better marginal integrity under clinical circumstances.
Abdalla
A I
AI
Department of Dental Materials Science, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), The Netherlands.
Davidson
C L
CL
D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D001840:Dental Bonding / Q000379:methods*; D003743:Dental Enamel / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000517:prevention & control; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry*; D006801:Humans; D008855:Microscopy, Electron, Scanning; D013499:Surface Properties
D003188:Composite Resins; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents