English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aim: To assess the effect of three lining materials; flowable composite, flowable compomer, and light-curing glass ionomer cement (LCGIC) on microleakage in Class V restoration using packable composite restorations. Materials and Methods: A standardized class V cavity was prepared on buccal surface of 40 young premolar teeth with the cervical margin extending 0.5 mm below the cementoenamel junction, into the dentin. All the samples were randomly divided into 4 groups according to the lining material used: Group IControl; Group IIflowable composite; Group IIILCGIC and Group IVflowable compomer. The restored teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Each tooth was then sectioned along buccolingual direction. The dye penetration of the occlusal and gingival margins of each section was evaluated by a single observer using a stereomicroscope and statistically analyzed using Kruskal Walis Test and Mann-Whitney U Test. Result: Maximum dye penetration score for Group 1, Group 2 was 3 and Group 3, Group 4 was 1. (p<0.05) Conclusion: Flowable compomer and light cure glass ionomer cement as intermediate lining material can reduce microleakage under packable composite.

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT CAVITY LINING MATERIALS ON MARGINAL SEALING OF PACKABLE COMPOSITE RESIN RESTORATIONS- AN IN VITRO STUDY.