Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess microleakage on class V cavities prepared by Er:YAG laser with varying surface treatment. BACKGROUND DATA: There has been little reported research on microleakage at cavities prepared and treated with Er:YAG laser. METHODS: Fifty preparations using Er:YAG laser or a highspeed handpiece were developed. The surface treatment was performed as follows: Er:YAG laser (group 1); 35% phosphoric acid (group 2); laser + acid (group 3); finishing with low-speed + laser + acid (group 4); conventional preparation developed with a high-speed handpiece + acid (group 5--control). The samples were restored with Single Bond/Z250, thermocycled, isolated, and immersed in a 50% AgNO(3) solution. The restorations were sectioned, and the microleakage was measured in milimeters using a specific computer software. Data were analyzed employing ANOVAand Tukey test. RESULTS: Statistical analysis showed that group 5 (G5) obtained the lowest results of microleakage (22.05%), and it was statistically similar (p > 0.05) to G1 (37.7%) and different (p < 0.05) from the other groups (G2 = 50.4%; G3 = 43%; G4 = 44.2%). The occlusal margins (22.62%) demonstrated less microleakage (p < 0.05) than the cervical margins (56.32%). CONCLUSION: The use of Er:YAG laser for cavity preparation and surface treatment negatively influenced the marginal sealing of composite resin restorations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chinelatti et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: