Objectives: This in vitro research was performed to assess the flexural and compressive strengths of EQUIA, GC Gold Hybrid (GH), and conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) restorative materials. ...Materials and methods: This study compares three restorative Materials: group I-EQUIA Forte GIC, group II-GC GH, and group III-conventional GIC for compressive and flexural strength evaluation. With a specially made Teflon mold, thirty-six cylindrical test specimens measuring 4 mm × 5 mm in dimension were created. They were then placed in 20 mL of deionized water and kept at 37°C for 3 hours every day for 30 days. Later, they were subjected to compressive strength and flexural strength using the universal testing machine. Statistics were used to examine each and every result. Result and Conclusion: EQUIA had the highest average compressive strength and flexural strength, whereas traditional GIC restorative material had the lowest.
Context: Success or failure of a restoration depends on its ability to bond to the tooth structure, to reduce microleakage, and to inhibit secondary caries. Fluoride-releasing materials have the ...inherent potential to release fluoride and are also capable of recharging themselves with topical agents. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the effect of fluoride recharge on microleakage of different restorative materials. Materials and Methods: Eighty extracted teeth were collected and split mesiodistally into 160 specimens. Class V cavities were prepared on buccal and lingual surfaces. Specimens were divided into four groups of 40 each based on the restorative material. Group I: Glass ionomer; Group II: Resin composite; Group III: Giomer; and Group IV: Alkasite. The restored teeth were stored in artificial saliva. Each group was divided into four subgroups for fluoride recharge and subsequent confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) examination: (A) no fluoride recharge and CLSM examination after 24 h, (B) no fluoride recharge and CLSM examination after 3 weeks, (C) fluoride recharge once at third week followed by CLSM examination at 6 weeks, and (D) fluoride recharge twice at third week and sixth week followed by CLSM examination at 9 weeks. Statistical Analysis: Kruskal−Wallis and Mann−Whitney U tests were performed to analyze the obtained data. Results: A significant difference in microleakage was noted among resin composite and other groups except Cention-N, whereas no significant difference was noted pre- and post-fluoride recharge. Conclusion: Increased microleakage was noted post-fluoride recharge, although statistically not significant.
Background and Aims. Retrieval of separated rotary file may not be possible many times. Then sealing of coronal root canal system depends on sealing ability of root canal sealers. The type of seal to ...be obtained should be bacterial-tight seal. Hence it is important to evaluate the sealing ability of obturation with different newer sealers with separated file in apical 3rd of root canals with bacterial penetration method using e.fecalis. Methods: Forty six human mandibular molars extracted for periodontal reasons were collected. After Decoronation of teeth Protaper rotary S1 files (Dentsply Maillefer) were intentionally separated in apical third of canal and obturated with gutta-percha (Prime Dental Products, India) along with zinc oxide eugenol sealer (Dental products of India-Mumbai) in Group I, Nano Zinc oxide eugenol (Nano Research Lab, Jharkand, India) in Group II and MTA sealer (Angelus, Londrina, Brazil) in Group III. Samples were assessed for bacterial leakage with E fecalis for 48 hours. The number of colony forming units was assessed. Results: The values obtained were subjected to one way ANOVA test and significance level was set to 0.05. Group I scored the highest mean value of (6.58), followed by Group II (3.91). The lowest Mean value was with Group III (2.91). However there was no statistical significant difference in Mean values among groups with (p-value 0.05). Conclusion: The mean value of colony forming units in Group III was 2.91, in Group II 3.91 and 6.58 in Group I. None of the groups demonstrated complete bacteria-tight seal.
