Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the microleakage and bond strength of Class V silorane-based and universal micro-hybrid composite restorations prepared either with diamond bur or with an erbium, chromium: yttrium-scandium-gallium-garnet (Er, Cr:YSGG) laser. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 160 molar teeth were used for microleakage assessment and shear bond strength (SBS) test. The specimens were prepared using either diamond bur or 3 W-, 4 W- and 5 W-20 Hz Er, Cr:YSGG laser irradiation. All specimens were subjected to thermocycling (500 times at 5 ± 2°C to 55 ± 2°C, dwell time 15 s and transfer time 10 s). Microleakage was assessed using a 0.5% basic-fuchsin solution. The bond strengths were determined using a microtensile tester at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min. The Kruskal Wallis test was used for the analysis of microleakage and a one-way analysis of variance test was used to analyze the SBS (P < 0.05). RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found (P > 0.05) between Er, Cr:YSGG laser and bur preparation methods regarding microleakage and bond strength values. CONCLUSION: Irradiation with Er, Cr:YSGG laser was confirmed to be as effective as conventional methods for preparing cavities before adhesive restorations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Korkmaz et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: