首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH >Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage – An In Vitro Study
【2h】

Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage – An In Vitro Study

机译:两种不同的坑隙和缝隙密封剂与修复材料检查其微渗漏的比较评估–一项体外研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare three different pit and fissure sealants with different composition to check their effectiveness for sealing ability and microleakage.>Materials & Methods: Total 120 therapeutically extracted premolars devoid of any caries, anomalies or morphogenic diversity were collected and distributed equally in three groups (40 in each). Group – I: Composite based Pit and fissure sealant, Group -II: Compomer- restorative material and GROUP-III: Glass ionomer cement based pit and fissure sealant. Samples were cleaned with slurry of pumice and etched with phosphoric acid etchant. After thorough washing and drying, teeth were treated and cured with three sealants having different composition followed by thermocycling and immersion in methylene blue dye for 24 hours. Teeth were then observed and score was given for microleakage. The sections were photographed to show score of "0", "1", or "2" microleakage and the data was statistically analyzed with the non parametric test (Kruskal Walis test).>Results: Composite material was found better for sealant material as it was showing significantly least microleakage as compare to Glass Inomer Cement and promising result with compomer.>Conclusion: Besides many inventions, researches and nano-technology implementation in dental materials, composite material is comparatively better than Glass Inomer Cement and compomer as sealant materials.>How to cite this article: Joshi K, Dave B, Joshi N, Rajashekhara BS, Jobanputra LS, Yagnik K. Comparative Evaluation of Two Different Pit & Fissure Sealants and a Restorative Material to check their Microleakage – An In Vitro Study. J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(4):35-39.
机译:>背景:本研究的目的是调查和比较三种具有不同成分的凹坑和裂缝密封剂,以检查其密封能力和微渗漏的有效性。>材料和方法:总计收集120颗没有任何龋齿,异常或形态发生多样性的治疗性前磨牙,并将其平均分为三组(每组40个)。第I组:复合材料基坑和缝隙密封剂,第II组:复合物修复材料,第III组:玻璃离聚物水泥基基坑和裂隙密封剂。用浮石浆清洗样品,并用磷酸蚀刻剂蚀刻。彻底清洗和干燥后,用三种成分不同的密封剂处理和固化牙齿,然后热循环并浸入亚甲基蓝染料中24小时。然后观察牙齿并给出微渗漏的评分。拍摄这些切片以显示微渗漏评分为“ 0”,“ 1”或“ 2”,并使用非参数检验(Kruskal Walis检验)对数据进行统计分析。>结果:发现它比密封剂材料更好,因为与玻璃Inomer水泥相比,它的微泄漏显着最少,并且与复合材料相比有希望的结果。 >如何引用本文: Joshi K,Dave B,Joshi N,Rajashekhara BS,Jobanputra LS,YagnikK。两种不同深坑的比较评价裂隙密封剂和修复材料以检查其微渗漏–一项体外研究。 《国际口腔卫生杂志》 2013; 5(4):35-39。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号