Купить СНПЧ А7 Архангельск, оперативня доставка

crosscheckdeposited

Adaptação Marginal de Restaurações de Cerâmica e Resina Composta de Laboratário

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15603/2176-1000/odonto.v15n29p73-80

https://www.metodista.br/revistas/revistas-ims/index.php/O1/index 

downloadpdf

Maria I. Roda1, Antonio A. de Cara2, Claudia I. Capp3, Maitê A. Camargo4 & Marco A. Scanavini5

 

Resumo: O objetivo desta pesquisa foi comparar a adaptação marginal entre restaurações de cerâmica feldspática (Noritake) e duas resinas compostas de laboratório (Artglass e Targis). Analisou-se, através da microscopia óptica, a magnitude da fenda marginal nas faces mesial, distal e lingual. Um pré-molar superior foi preparado para receber uma restauração do tipo onlay MOD com cobertura da cúspide lingual. A partir deste elemento, foram confeccionadas 30 réplicas em NiCr divididas em 3 grupos: l) Noritake; ll) Artglass; lll) Targis. As restaurações foram posicionadas em suas respectivas réplicas e observadas ao microscópio óptico (40X), conectado a um microcomputador. As imagens foram capturadas através do software Microsoft VidCap 32 e as fendas medidas com auxilio de um cursor de distância (software Imagelab 2000). As médias (μm) obtidas foram: grupo l) mesial 64,50 (+38,26), lingual 47,50 (+35,69) e distal 53,00 (+29,36); grupo ll) mesial 56,00 (+25,03), lingual 35,50 (+25,65) e distal 56,00 (+19,55); grupo lll) mesial 69,50 (+9,56), lingual 53,00 (+20,44) e distal 55,50 (+29,29). A análise de variância de dois fatores (face e material) demonstrou que não houve diferenças significantes entre os materiais estudados (5%). Entretanto, foram encontradas diferenças significantes entre as faces e foi, então, aplicado o teste de Tukey (5%). As médias (μm) encontradas foram: mesial 63,33, distal 54,33 e lingual 45,33. Conclusões: não houve diferença significante entre a adaptação marginal dos materiais estudados (Noritake, Artglass e Targis). A face mesial apresentou maior fenda, quando comparada à lingual.

Palavras-chave: Adaptação marginal; Restauração indireta; Resina composta; Cerâmica

 

Abstract: The objective of this research was to compare the marginal adaptation between feldspatic ceramic (Noritake) and two laboratory composite resins (Artglass and Targis). The magnitude of the marginal fissure in the mesial, distal and lingual faces was analyzed through optical microscopy. An upper pre-molar was prepared to receive an onlay restoration covering lingual cuspid. Starting from this element, 30 replicas were made in NiCr, and divided into 3 groups: l) Noritake; ll) Artglass; lll) Targis. Restorations were positioned in their respective replicas and observed through optical microscope (40X) connected to a microcomputer. The images were captured by a Microsoft VidCap 32 software and the fissures measured with the aid of a distance cursor (Imagelab 2000 software). The averages (μm) obtained were: group l) mesial 64,50 (+38.26), lingual 47.50 (+35.69) and distal 53.00 (+29.36); group ll) mesial 56.00 (+25.03), lingual 35.50 (+25.65) and distal 56.00 (+19.55); group lll) mesial 69.50 (+9.56), lingual 53.00 (+20.44) and distal 55.50 (+29.29). The results, through the Two-factor Analysis of Variance (face and material), demonstrated that there were no significant differences among the studied materials. However, significant differences were found among the faces, then, it was applied the Tukey’s test (5%). The averages (μm) found were: mesial 63.33, distal 54.33 and lingual 45.33. Conclusions: there was no significant difference among the marginal adaptation of the studied materials (Noritake, Artglass and Targis). Mesial faces presented larger fissures when compared to the lingual faces.

Key words: Marginal adaptation; Indirect restoration; Composite resin; Ceramic

 

1 Especialista e Mestre em Dentística pela FOUSP.
2 Professor Doutor do Departamento de Dentística da FOUSP.
3 Professora Assistente da Disciplina de Odontopediatria da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo.
4 Mestre e Doutora em Dentística pela FOUSP.
5 Coordenador e Professor Doutor do Programa de Pós-Graduação - Área de Concentração em Ortodontia da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo.

 

Literatura Citada

ABBATE MF, TJAN AHL, FOX WM. Comparison of the marginal fit of various ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1989 May; 61 (5):527-531. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90270-9

AUDENINO G, BRESCIANO ME, BASSI F, CAROSSA S. In vitro evaluation of fit adhesively luted ceramic inlays. Int J Prosthodont 1999 July/Aug; 12 (4): 342-347.

BEHR M, ROSENTRITT M, LEIBROCK A, SCHNEIDERFEYRER S, HANDEL G. In-vitro study of fracture strength and marginal adaption of fibre-reinforced adhesive fixed partial inlay dentures. J Dent 1999 Feb; 27 (2): 163-16 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00036-0

BLANK JT. Scientifically based rationale and protocol for use of modern indirect resin inlays and onlays. J Esthet Dent 2000; 12 (4): 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2000.tb00222.x

CARA AA, RODA MI, MOLDES VL, CAPP CI. Resinas compostas de laboratório. Espelho clínico – Informativo da APCD de São Caetano do Sul 2000 fev; 3 (18): 4-7.

CELIK C, GEMALMAZ D. Comparison of marginal integrity of ceramic and composite veneer restorations luted with two different resin agents: an in vitro study. Int J Prosthodont 2002 Jan/Feb; 15 (1): 59-64.

DHAWAN P, PRAKASH H, SHAH N. Clinical and scanning electon microscopic assessments of porcelain and ceromer resin veneers. Indian J Dent Res 2003 Oct/Dec; 14 (4): 264-278.

DIETSCHI D, MAEDER M, HOLZ J. In vitro evaluation of marginal fit and morphology of fired ceramic inlays. Quintessence Int 1992 Apr; 23 (4): 271-278.

FUZZI M, LUTHY H, WOHLWEND A, DI FEBO G, CARNEVALE G, CALDARI R. Marginal fit of three different porcelain onlay bonded to tooth: an in vitro study. Int J Periodontol Rest Dent 1991 Apr/May; 11 (4/5): 303-315.

GARDNER FM. Margins of complete crowns – Literature review. J Prosthet Dent 1982 Oct; 48 (4): 396-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(82)90072-5

GROTEN M, GIRTHOFER S, Probster L. Marginal fit consistency of copy-milled all-ceramic crowns during fabrication by light and scanning electron microscopic analysis in vitro. J Oral Rehabil 1997 Dec; 24 (12): 871-881. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1997.00592.x

GUZMAN AF, MOORE BK, ANDRES CJ. Wear resistance of four luting agents as a function of marginal gap distance, cement type, and restorative material. Int J Prosthodont 1997 Sept; 10 (5): 415-425.

HOLMES JR, BAYNE SC, HOLLAND GA, SULIK WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent 1989 Oct; 62 (4): 405-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(89)90170-4

HUNG SH, HUNG KS, EICK JD, CHAPPELL RP. Marginal fit of porcelain-fused-to-metal and two types of ceramic crown. J Prosthet Dent 1990 Jan; 63 (2): 26-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(90)90260-J

KAYTAN B, ONAL B, PALMIR T, TEZEL H. Clinical evaluation of indirect resin composite and ceramic onlays over a 24-month period. Gen Dent 2005 Sep-Oct; 53 (5): 329-34.

KAWAI K, ISENBERG BP, LEINFELDER KF. Effect of gap dimension on composite resin cement wear. Quintessence Int 1994 Jan; 25 (1): 53-58.

KREJCI I, LUTZ F, GAUTSCHI L. Wear and marginal adaptation of composite resin inlays. J Prosthet Dent 1994 Sept; 72 (3): 233-244.

KREJCI I, BORETTI R, GIEZENDANNER P, LUTZ F. Adhesive crowns and fixed partial dentures fabricated of ceromer/ FRC: clinical and laboratory procedures. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998 May; 10 (4): 487-498.

KOCZARSKI MJ. Utilization of ceromer inlays/onlays for replacement of amalgam restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998 May; 10 (4): 405-412.

LEINFELDER KF. New developments in resin restorative systems. J Am Dent Assoc 1997 May; 128 (5): 573-582. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1997.0256

MCLEAN JW, VON FRAUNHOFER JA. The estimation of cement film thickness by an in vivo technique. Br Dent J 1971 Aug; 131 (3): 107-111. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4802708

MEYER FILHO A, VIEIRA LCC, ARAUJO É, BARATIERI LN. Ceramic inlays and onlays: clinical procedures for predictable results. J Esthet Restor Dent 2003; 15 (6): 338-352.

MIARA P. Aesthetic guidelines for second generation indirect inlay and onlay composite restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1998 May;10 (4): 423-431.

MOLIN M, KARLSSON S. The fit of gold inlays and three ceramic inlays systems. A clinical and in vitro study. Acta Odontol Scand 1993 Jan; 51 (1): 201-206. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359309040568

O’NEAL SJ, MIRACLE RL, LEINFELDER KF. Evaluating interfacial gaps for esthetic inlays. J Am Dent Assoc 1993 Dec; 124 (12): 48-54. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1993.0253

PICOSSE M. Anatomia dentária. 4. ed. São Paulo: Sarvier, 1983. 216 p.

QUALTROUGH AJE, CRAMER A, WILSON NHF, ROULET JF, NOACK M. An in vitro evaluation of the marginal integrity of a porcelain inlay system. Int J Prosthodont 1991 Nov/Dec; 4 (6): 517-523.

QUINTAS AF, OLIVEIRA F, BOTTINO MA. Vertical marginal discrepancy of ceramic copings with different ceramic materials, finish lines, and luting agents: an in vitro evaluation. J Prosthet Dent 2004 Sep; 92 (3): 250-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.06.023

SATO T, WOHLWEND A, SCHAERER P. Marginal fit in a “shrink-free” ceramic crown system. Int J Periodontol Restorative Dent 1986 Mar; 6 (3): 8-21.

SCHAERER P, SATO T, WOHLWEND A. A comparison of the marginal fit of three cast ceramic crown systems. J Prosthet Dent 1988 May; 59 (5): 534-542. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(88)90065-0

SHELLARD E, DUKE ES. Indirect composite resin materials for posterior applications. Compendium 1999 Dec; 20 (12):1166-1171.

SOARES CJ, MARTINS LR, FERNANDES NETO AJ, GIANNINI M. Marginal adaptation of indirect composites and ceramic inlay systems. Oper Dent 2003 Nov-Dec; 28 (6): 689-94

SULAIMAN F, CHAI J, JAMESON LM, WOZNIAK WT. A comparison of the marginal fit of In-Ceram, IPS Empress, and Procera crowns. Int J Prosthodont 1997 Sept; 10 (5): 478-483.

TOUATI B. The evolution of aesthetic restorative materials of inlays and onlays: A review. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1996 Sept; 8 (7): 657-666.

USHIWATA O, MORAES JV, BOTTINO MA, SILVA EG. Marginal fit of nickel-chromium copings before and after internal adjustments with duplicated stone dies and disclosing agent. J Prosthet Dent 2000 June; 83 (6): 634-643. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpr.2000.106551

VAN DIJKEN JWV, HOGLUND-ALBERG C, OLOFSSON AL. Fired ceramic inlays: a 6-year follow up. J Dent 1998 Mar; 26 (3): 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(97)00005-5