الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 120 |  |  |
| | | from | 120 | | |
Abstract
This study was conducted to compare the microleakage of calcium silicate based cement (Biodentine) versus the glass ionomer cements (Resin modified glass ionomer cement RMGIC, Conventional glass ionomer cement GIC). In addition, to compare the ability of the tested materials to prevent the bacterial adhesion to the restoration surface.
For microleakage test, 120 standardized class V cavities were preparated over cemento-enamel junction on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 60 extracted human molar teeth .The teeth were divided into two groups, according to cavity walls pretreatment or no : G1 conditioning with polyacrylic acid (n=60), G2 without conditioning (n=60). Then each group was subdivided into three subgroup according to the restorative material, SG1 biodentine (n=20), SG2 RMGIC (n=20), SG3 CGIC (n=20). Each subgroup was further subdivided into two divisions according to storage periods, 2 days storage, or 2 months storage (n=10). The restorations were applied according to manufactures’ instructions. Then the teeth were thermocylced for 2500 cycles (5°C- 55°C). Then the teeth utilized for dye penetration were immersed in 2% lichman dye for 24 hrs. Each tooth was sectioned longitudinally in a bucco-lingual direction; the extent of dye penetration at the occlusal and cervical margins of each restoration was examined under stereomicroscope at 40× magnification. For bacterial adhesion test, eight discs were constructed from each material, with the aid of a Teflon mold. The test was performed on 24-well plates (Falcon), to evaluate the streptococcal mutans bacterial adhesion. Each material disc was placed on the well, using sterile techniques, and exposed to a standard bacterial suspensions astatestical analysis of the coolected date was carried out using one way ANOVA, for siginifacne among groups. Mann Whitney test was used for comparison between each two groups.For the dye penetration scores of cavities restored with different restorations, the results revealed that Biodentine showed the lowest values of microleakage, to be followed by resin modified glass ionomer cement RMGIC, and conventional glass ionomer cements GIC,with significant differences between Biodentine and resin modified glass ionomer cement RMGIC, and between Biodentine and conventional glass ionomer cement GIC. For bacterial adhesion there was a highly statistical significant difference between the three tested materials. Biodentine showed the lowest adhesion values, while the resin modified glass ionomer cement RMGIC showed highest adhesion values than the conventional glass ionomer cement GIC.