Assessment of Microleakage and Shear Bond Strength of Conventional GIC, Nanocomposite and RMGIC Restorative Materials

Main Article Content

Pratiksha Sahare
Parvaze Ahmad Parvaze
Varad R. Hiremath
Vardharajula Venkata Ramaiah
Shreyas N. Shah
Mahesh Melkundi

Abstract

Objectives: To assess microleakage and shear bond strength of conventional GIC, RM GIC and nanocomposite restorative materials.


Materials and method: Occlusal portion of crowns were flattened. Prepared Class II cavities were restored with respective restorative materials; Group A- Conventional GIC, Group B- RMGIC and Group C- nanocomposites. Shear bond strength was assessed using universal testing machine (INSTRON). Microleakage was examined with stereomicroscope. Obtained data was statistically analysed.


Results: Results showed that nanocomposite had superior shear bond strength followed by resin modified GIC and leat with conventional GIC. Nanocomposites and conventional GIC had good microleakage compared to RM GIC.


Conclusion: Nanocomposit had higher shear bond strength and least microleakage in comparition to other groups.

Article Details

How to Cite
Sahare, P. ., Parvaze, P. A. ., Hiremath, V. R., Venkata Ramaiah, V. ., Shah, S. N., & Melkundi, M. . (2023). Assessment of Microleakage and Shear Bond Strength of Conventional GIC, Nanocomposite and RMGIC Restorative Materials. Journal of Coastal Life Medicine, 11(1), 1353–1356. Retrieved from https://www.jclmm.com/index.php/journal/article/view/520
Section
Articles

References

Jain K, Katge F, Poojari M, Shetty S, Patil D, Ghadge S. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Bioactive, Ormocer, and Conventional GIC Restorative Materials in Primary Molars: An In Vitro Study Microleakage of Three Restorative Materials. International Journal of Dentistry. 2022, Article ID 7932930; 1-7

Raju VG, Venumbaka NR, Mungara J, Vijayakumar P, Rajendran S, Elangovan A. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and microleakage of tricalcium silicate-based restorative material and radioopaque posterior glass ionomer restorative cement in! primary and permanent teeth: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014;32:304-10.

Albadah AS, Khan AM. An in Vitro Study Comparing Nano-Composite Microleakage with and without Hydroxyapatite-Reinforced Glass Ionomer Cement and Cention N as a Base Material in Class I Cavity. P J M H S. 2022;16(5): 400-402

Bilgrami A, Maqsood A, Alam MK, Ahmed N, Mustafa M , Alqahtani AR, et al. Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength between Resin Composites and Conventional Glass Ionomer Cement in Class II Restorative Technique—An In Vitro Study. Materials 2022;15:1-15

Ganeriwal S, Gupta C, Kundabala M, Ginjupalli K, Shenoy R. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength of Two Nanofilled Posterior Composites as Core Build Up Materials: An In Vitro Study.Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences. 2016;7(5):1062-1066

Alkhudhairy FI, Ahmad ZH. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of arious Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(12):997-1002.

El Halim SA. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength of a bioactive composite and nano-composite: an in vitro study. Egyptian Dental Journal. 2018; 64, 1653-1659

Panchal PC, Venkataraghavan K, Panchal CR. Comparative Evaluation of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Two Self-adhering Composite Resins: An In vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018;19(9):1082-1086.