Influence of the additional Er:YAG laser conditioning step on the microleakage of class V restorations

✍ Scribed by Marcella Esteves-Oliveira; Wendell L. Carvalho; Carlos de P. Eduardo; Denise M. Zezell

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 2008
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 91 KB
• Volume: 87B
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 1552-4973
• DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.31141

✦ Synopsis

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of an additional Er:YAG laser conditioning step after laser cavity preparations, on the microleakage of class V composite restorations. Forty‐eight bovine incisors were randomly divided into four groups: G1(control) cavities prepared with bur, G2‐ cavities prepared with laser (400 mJ/2 Hz), G3‐ cavities prepared and subsequently conditioned with Er:YAG laser (60 mJ/2 Hz); G4‐idem for G3, but the laser conditioning was carried out without water‐spray. All the cavities were restored using Clearfill SE Bond® and Z‐250® composite resin. The samples were thermal cycled for 700 cycles and then immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution. The sectioned restorations were exposed to a photoflood lamp to reveal silver nitrate penetration. The Kruskal‐Walis one‐way analyses of variance test and post hoc Wilcoxon pair‐wise comparison were used to compare microleakage degrees. At the gingival margin G2 showed a lower microleakage mean than the control bur‐prepared cavities (p = 0.0003). At occlusal margins there were no statistically significant differences between the groups (p = 0.28). It may be concluded that Er:YAG laser class V cavity preparations do not need to be followed by an additional laser conditioning step to result in levels of microleakage similar to or lower than those obtained after bur preparations. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2008