Real-time measurement of dentinal tubular fluid flow during and after amalgam and composite restorations.
10.5395/JKACD.2009.34.6.467
- Author:
Sun Young KIM
1
;
Byeong Hoon CHO
;
Seung Ho BAEK
;
Bum Sun LIM
;
In Bog LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Korea. inboglee@snu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Dentinal tubular fluid flow;
Amalgam;
Composite;
Bonding system
- MeSH:
Adhesives;
Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate;
Dentin;
Hydrostatic Pressure;
Molar, Third;
Paint;
Resin Cements;
Tooth;
Tooth Cervix
- From:Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry
2009;34(6):467-476
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
The aim of this study was to measure the dentinal tubular fluid flow (DFF) during and after amalgam and composite restorations. A newly designed fluid flow measurement instrument was made. A third molar cut at 3 mm apical from the CEJ was connected to the flow measuring device under a hydrostatic pressure of 15 cmH2O. Class I cavity was prepared and restored with either amalgam (Copalite varnish and Bestaloy) or composite (Z-250 with ScotchBond MultiPurpose: MP, Single Bond 2: SB, Clearfil SE Bond: CE and Easy Bond: EB as bonding systems). The DFF was measured from the intact tooth state through restoration procedures to 30 minutes after restoration, and re-measured at 3 and 7days after restoration. Inward fluid flow (IF) during cavity preparation was followed by outward flow (OF) after preparation. In amalgam restoration, the OF changed to IF during amalgam filling and slight OF followed after finishing. In composite restoration, application CE and EB showed a continuous OF and air-dry increased rapidly the OF until light-curing, whereas in MP and SB, rinse and dry caused IF and OF, respectively. Application of hydrophobic bonding resin in MP and CE caused a decrease in flow rate or even slight IF. Light-curing of adhesive and composite showed an abrupt IF. There was no statistically significant difference in the reduction of DFF among the materials at 30 min, 3 and 7 days after restoration (P > 0.05).
