The aims of the present article were to assess the reliability of different techniques to assess marginal defects in Class II restorations in retrieved primary molars, and to determine the degree of agreement between the various assessment modalities. The material evaluated was comprised of 18 exfoliated primary molars that had been restored 20 to 22 months previously with a resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer--7 teeth), a hybridized composite resin (Z100 + Scotchbond Multipurpose--9 teeth), and amalgam (Dispersalloy--2 teeth). No significant differences could be observed between the groups. The majority of the restorations rated A at the buccal and lingual margins, but poor adaptation was disclosed at the cervical margin of the three types of restorations. SEM evaluation revealed that the highest percentage of defects was seen at the cervical margins with no statistically significant difference between the groups. No or minimal leakage was present at the occlusal margins and severe penetration of dye was seen at the cervical margins in all groups. Significantly less demineralization was seen adjacent to the Vitremer and Z100 restorations when compared to the Dispersalloy but no difference was found between the esthetic restorations. Except for the visual tactile examination, small marginal defects could be disclosed by the three assessment techniques (SEM, dye penetration, and polarized light microscopy). A good degree of agreement was observed between the three evaluation techniques.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Pages (from-to)||6-16, 67|
|Journal||Refuat ha-peh eha-shinayim (1993)|
|State||Published - Oct 2002|
ASJC Scopus subject areas