An in vitro comparative SEM study of marginal adaptation of IRM, light- and chemically-cured glass ionomer, and amalgam in furcation perforations.
The furcation regions of 30 human mandibular molars were perforated and sealed using four different materials: IRM, light- and chemically-cured glass ionomer cement (GIC), and amalgam. The materials were compared for marginal gaps in coronal, mid, and apical regions after routine SEM processing. While light-cured GIC showed the smallest gaps in the three regions, in mid and coronal regions chemically-cured GIC, and in apical regions amalgam, showed the largest gaps. IRM cases showed the highest rate of fillings with a good "fit", whereas the majority of amalgam cases and none of the chemically-cured GIC cases were overfilled.
D003723:Dental Amalgam / Q000627:therapeutic use; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003786:Dental Pulp Cavity / Q000293:injuries*; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods*; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements / Q000627:therapeutic use; D006801:Humans; D008768:Methylmethacrylates / Q000627:therapeutic use; D008963:Molar / Q000293:injuries; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D018677:Tooth Injuries / Q000628:therapy*; D014092:Tooth Root / Q000293:injuries*; D015035:Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement / Q000627:therapeutic use
D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D008768:Methylmethacrylates; D012387:Root Canal Filling Materials; D015035:Zinc Oxide-Eugenol Cement; C031667:IRM cement; D003723:Dental Amalgam