Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Dec 30;25(4):259-266.
doi: 10.5978/islsm.16-OR-20.

Microleakage in Class V Composite Restorations after Desensitizing Surface Treatment with Er:YAG and CO2 Lasers

Hamid Reza Mozaffari  1 , Alireza Ehteshami  2 , Farshad Zallaghi  2 , Nasim Chiniforush  3 , Zohreh Moradi  4
Affiliations

Microleakage in Class V Composite Restorations after Desensitizing Surface Treatment with Er:YAG and CO2 Lasers

Hamid Reza Mozaffari et al. Laser Ther. .

Abstract

Aims: Glutaraldehyde, CO2 and Er:YAG lasers can be used for treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. However, their application may have adverse effects on the clinical service of restorations. This study aimed to assess the microleakage in composite restorations following surface treatment with Glutaraldehyde desensitizer, CO2 and Er:YAG laser irradiation for treatment of dentin hypersensitivity. Materials and methods: This experimental study was conducted on 60 extracted sound human teeth. Class V cavities were prepared measuring 3×3 mm using a diamond bur. Specimens were randomly divided into 4 groups of 15. Group one:no surface treatment, Group two:applying Glutaraldehyde desensitizer, Groups of three and four were irradiated with CO2 and Er:YAG lasers, respectively. Surfaces were restored with bonding agent (Single Bond 2, 3M, USA) and Z250 composite (3M, USA). Specimens were thermocycled and immersed in 1% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Microleakage scores were assessed under a stereomicroscope at ×20 magnification. Data were analyzed using SPSS and the Kruskal Wallis test (P=0.05). Results: There was no significant difference between microleakage of groups in enamel margins (P=0.694). The difference in microleakage at the dentin margin was significant between groups (P=0.018). Conclusions: Application of Glutaraldehyde-desensitizer and CO2 laser irradiation of surfaces prior to composite restoration do not increase microleakage at the enamel or dentin margins but tooth surface treatment with Er:YAG laser significantly increased the microleakage at the dentin margins.

Keywords: CO2 laser; Dentin hypersensitivity; Er:YAG laser; Glutaraldehyde desensitizer; Microleakage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:
Grade zero
Figure 2:
Figure 2:
Grade 1 at enamel margin
Figure 3:
Figure 3:
Grade 2
Figure 4:
Figure 4:
Grade 3
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Addy M. Dentine hypersensitivity: New perspectives on an old problem. Int Dent J 2002; 52: 367-375.
    1. Kimura Y, Wilder-Smith P, Yonaga K, Matsumoto K. Treatment of dentine hypersensitivity by lasers: a review. J Clin Periodontol 2000; 27(10): 715-721. - PubMed
    1. Rees JS. The prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity in general dental practice in the UK. J ClinPeriodontol 2000; 27(11): 860-865. - PubMed
    1. Fischer C, Fischer RG, Wennberg A. Prevalence and distribution of cervical dentine hypersensitivity in a population in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. J Dent 1992; 20(5): 272-6. - PubMed
    1. Zappa U. Self-applied treatments in the management of dentine hypersensitivity. Arch Oral Biol 1994; 39 Suppl: 107S-112S. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources