Comparative evaluation of two different isolation techniques in restoration of noncarious cervical lesions using flowable composite: A split-mouth in vivo study.

Citation metadata

From: Journal of Oral Research and Review(Vol. 13, Issue 1)
Publisher: Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd.
Document Type: Article
Length: 2,402 words
Lexile Measure: 1730L

Document controls

Main content

Article Preview :

Byline: Kakollu. Sudha, Jyothsna. Kasireddy, Dunnala. Sowjanya, Mekala. Ashwini, Kurati. Sakyarshi

Context: Proper method of isolation plays a key role in the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Aims: The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the efficacy of two isolation techniques in restoring NCCLs using flowable composite. Settings and Design: Forty patients who fulfill the inclusion criteria were selected based on the power of the study (0.86). The participants were divided into two groups according to the split-mouth design. Materials and Methods: In Group A, lesion isolation was done using the Mylar matrix band with photocurable gingival barrier, and in Group B, using Metal matrix band and gingival barrier. The restorations were assessed immediately and after 6 months, using modified US Public Health Service criteria: marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, wear, retention, secondary caries, and postoperative sensitivity. Statistical Analysis: IBM SPSS (version 21.0) software was used. McNemar's and Chi-square tests were performed, considering P 0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitations of the study, both the groups performed similarly in isolation of NCCLs. However, long-term clinical studies must be needed for further evaluation.

Introduction

Noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) have multifactorial etiology and present restorative challenges, including isolation and moisture control.[1],[2],[3],[4]

The intrinsic anatomical and morphological characteristics of this area limit the placement of the rubber dam clamp.[5]

Flowable composites are the materials of choice for restoration of NCCLs, due to their esthetic and physical properties (Pecie et al ., 2011, and Perez et al ., 2012).[6]

To date, very few studies have reported the isolation techniques of these lesions. Hence, the aim of this in vivo study was to compare the clinical efficacy of two different isolation techniques for the restoration of NCCLs using flowable composite.

Aim

The aim of the present in vivo study was to compare the efficacy of two different isolating techniques in restoring NCCLs with flowable composite using modified US Public Health Service (USPHS) criteria.

Materials and Methods

Forty patients with a mean age of 35-50 years presenting with a chief complaint of NCCLs and dentinal hypersensitivity in the maxillary premolar region reported to the department of conservative dentistry and endodontics were selected for the study. Patients having at least four cervical lesions with lesion depth of 1.5-2 mm were included in the study. Root canal treated teeth, teeth with cervical caries, teeth with retentive clasps, and pulpally involved teeth were excluded from the study.

Approval was taken from the institutional ethical committee to conduct the study, and the procedures followed were in accordance with the institutional ethical standards. After confirming eligibility, the clinical procedure and the associated risks were explained to the patients. Informed consent was obtained from the patient after their approval.

The power of the study (0.86) was determined, and the sample size was set at 40. Patients who fulfill the inclusion criteria were divided into two groups ( n = 40).

In Group A, lesion isolation was done using photocurable gingival resin barrier material (Gingiva Shield VLC, Prevest Denpro Limited, Jammu,...

Source Citation

Source Citation   

Gale Document Number: GALE|A652812176