The Comparison of Microleakage between Bioactive Composite Resin and Compomer

Authors

  • Fani Pangabdian Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Hang Tuah
  • Yongki Hadinata Wijaya Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Hang Tuah
  • Dwi Acti Widyanita Profession Program of Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Universitas Hang Tuah

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30649/denta.v15i2.5

Keywords:

Microleakage, compomer, bioactive composite resin

Abstract

Background: The ideal restoration material should have endurance, compatible with tooth structure and visible surrounding tissues and must be able to restore the lost tissue. There are various restoration materials such as Compomer and Bioactive Composite Resin. Microleakage is one of the failure in surface sealent, and this may increase the risk of secondary caries. Purpose: The aim of this study was to prove and compare the differences of microleakage between Compomer and Bioactive Composite Resin in class I restoration. Material and Method: Maxilla’s first premolar teeth with class I cavities (diameter: 3mm, depth: 3mm) divided into two groups with 10 samples each group. Group I: Compomer (Dentsply), Group II: Bioactive Composite Resin (Activa Pulpdent USA). All group were immersed in 1% methylene blue solution for 24 hours, rinsed in running water, and section mesial-distal using carborundum disc. Afterward, section were assessed for dye penetration that represent the mickroleakage using scoring method under digital microscope. Finally data were collected and statistically analyzed. Result: There were significant differences between each group (p<0.05). Microleakage in restoration with Bioactive Composite Resin (1.7) shows smaller values than Compomer restoration (4.4). Conclusion: This research show that there is differentiation of microleakage between Compomer and Bioactive Composite Resin. In Bioactive Composite Resin found the smallest microleakage.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Sihombing, Marsha S. R. Perbandingan Kebocoran Mikro Dinding Gingiva Restorasi Resin Komposit Antara Teknik Inkremental, Bulk-Fill Yang Diaktivasi Sonik, Dan Tanpa Aktivasi Sonik [Thesis]. Surabaya; 2013.

Ayna B, Celenk S, et al. Microleakage of Glass Ionomer Based Restorative Materials in Primary Teeth : An Vitro Study. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice. 2018; 21: 1034-7.

Mirzaei M, Nejatbakhsh R, Yassini E, Kermanshah H, Omrani LR. Effect of Different Bonding Agent Curing Times on Microleakage of Composite Restorations in Enamel and Dentin Margins Using Two Curing Systems. JIDA. 2012; 330-5.

Poggio C, Beltrami R, Scribante A, Colombo M, Chiesa M. Shear Bond Strength of One-Step Self-Etch Adhesives: pH Influence. Dental Research Journal. 2015; 12(3), 209-14.

Permana DP, Sujatmiko B, & Yulianti R. Perbandingan Tingkat Kebocoran Mikro Resin Komposit Bulk-fill dengan Teknik Penumpatan Oblique Incremental dan Bulk. Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Indonesia. 2016; 2(3): 135-40.

Croll TP, Berg JH, & Donly KJ. Dental Repair Material: A Resin-Modified Glass-Ionomer Bioactive Ionic Resin-Based Composite. Compendium. 2015; 36(1), 1–8.

Chatzistavrou, Xanthippi & Lefkelidou, Anna & Papadopoulou, Lambrini & Pavlidou, Eleni & Paraskevopoulos, Konstantinos & Fenno, J. & Flannagan, Susan & González-Cabezas, Carlos & Kotsanos, Nikos & Papagerakis, Petros. 2018. Bactericidal and Bioactive Dental Composites. Frontiers in Physiology. 9. 10.3389/fphys.2018.00103.

Razavi R, Ahmadi Zenouz G, Gholinia H. Jafari M. Evaluation of the Effects of Different Mouthrinses on the Color Stability of One Type of Glass Ionomer, Compomer, and Giomer. J Dent Mater Tech. 2016; 5(1): 36-42.

Irwandana PW, Kristanti Y & Daradjati S. Perbedaan Perubahan Warna pada Bahan Restorasi Giomer dan Kompomer Pasca Aplikasi Bahan Bleaching Berbahan Dasar Hidrogen Peroksida 40% Sebagai Bahan in Office Bleaching. Jurnal Kedokteran Gigi. 2016; 7(2): 145-50.

Abrams T, Abrams S, Sivagurunathan K, Moravan V, Hellen W, Elman G, Amaechi B, Mandelis A. Detection of Caries Around Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer and Compomer Restorations Using Four Different Modalities In Vitro. Dent. J. 2018; 6(3) : 47.

Yuliarti RT, Suwelo IS, & Soemartono SH. Kandungan Unsur Fluor pada Email Gigi Tetap Muda dengan Tumpatan Semen Ionomer Kaca Viskositas Tinggi. Journal of Dentistry Indonesia. 2013; 15(2): 163-8.

Hepdeniz OK, Temel UB, Ugurlu M, Koskan O. 2016. The Effect of Surface Sealants with Different Filler Content on Microleakage of Class V Resin Composite Restorations. Eur J Dent. 10(2): 163-9.

Alkhudhairy FI & Ahmad ZH. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Various Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro Study. The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice. 2016; 17(12): 997-1002.

Pulpdent. A Closer Look at BioACTIVE Materials. 2015. Retrieved from https://www.pulpdent.com/activa-bioactive-white-paper/

Abdillah, Fadhil. Efek Fluor pada Bahan Restorasi Kompomer Dibandingkan dengan GIC terhadap Pencegahan Demineralisasi Enamel (In Vitro) [Thesis]. Surabaya: Fakultas Kedokteran Gigi Universitas Airlangga. 2016.

Garg Nisha, Garg Amit. Textbook of Dentistry 2nd Ed. Jaypee Brothers Medical Pub: New Delhi; 2013. P. 485-493.

Garcia D, Yaman P, Dennison J & Nevia GF. Polymerization Shrinkage and Depth of Cure of Bulk Fill Flowable Composite Resins. Journal of Operative Dentistry. 2014; 39 (4): 441-8.

Madyarani D, Nuraini P & Irmawati. Microleakage of Conventional Resin-Modified, Nano-ionomer Glass Ionomer Cement as Primary Teeth Feeling Material. Dental Journal. 2014; 47(4): 194-7.

Malarvizhi D, Karthick A, Gold Pearlin Mary N, Ventakesh A. Shrinkage in Composite: An nigma. J Int Oral Health. 2019; 11 : 244-8.

Mukuan T, Abidjulu J & Wicaksono DA. Gambaran Kebocoran Tepi Tumpatan Pasca Restorasi Resin Komposit pada Mahasiswa Program Studi Kedokteran Gigi angkatan 2005-2007. Jurnal e-GiGi (eG). 2013; 1(2): 115-20

Downloads

Published

2021-11-20

How to Cite

Fani Pangabdian, Yongki Hadinata Wijaya, & Dwi Acti Widyanita. (2021). The Comparison of Microleakage between Bioactive Composite Resin and Compomer. DENTA, 15(2), 86–91. https://doi.org/10.30649/denta.v15i2.5

Issue

Section

Articles