SUMMARY Statement of Problem: The long-term effect of the presence of porcelain laminate veneers (PLVs) on the health of the surrounding gingival issues is not available in the restorative literature. Purpose: To assess the long-term effect of PLVs on the health of the surrounding gingival tissues. A secondary aim was to correlate gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) scores with clinical parameters used for gingival health assessment in teeth treated with PLVs. Methods and Materials: Patients who received PLVs placed at the Graduate Restorative Clinic within a seven- to 14-year period were recalled for clinical evaluations. Periodontal measurements including gingival index (GI), periodontal pocket depth (PPD), gingival recession (GR), and clinical attachment level (CAL) were measured using a standard probe and indices. Gingival Crevicular Fluid (GCF) was measured with a Periotron machine (Periotron 8000, Oraflow Inc), using Periopaper (Periopaper Gingival Fluid Collection Strip, Oraflow Inc.) for fluid collection. Photographs of any observed clinical defect were taken. Data were tabulated using Excel 2010 (Microsoft Corp). Statistical analysis for all descriptive statistics was performed using SPSS 21 (SPSS Software, IBM Corp.) and Stata SE 13 (Stata Software, StataCorp). Repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was done to test for statistical significance of the mean pocket depths between the restored and unrestored surfaces of the veneered teeth. The significance level for all tests was p <0.05. Pearson's correlation coefficient was performed for testing statistical significance between GCF and GI and between GCF and PPD. Results: The frequency distribution of the GI included 47 PLVs (43%) with normal gingiva, 16 (15%) with mild inflammation, and 46 (42%) with moderate inflammation and bleeding on probing. The average PPD on the facial surface of the maxillary and mandibular PLVs was 2.17 mm and 2.16 mm, respectively. On the lingual surface, the average PPD was 2.10 mm for maxillary and 2.22 mm for mandibular PLVs. Gingival recession was seen in 27% of the evaluated PLVs. The repeated-measures ANOVA revealed p≥ 0.136, showing no statistical difference in the mean pocket depths between restored facial and unrestored lingual surfaces of the veneered teeth. A moderate correlation ( r =0.407) was found between GCF and GI, which was significant at p <0.001. No correlation ( r =0.124) was found between GCF and PPD, which was not significant at p =0.197. Conclusions: Gingival response to the evaluated PLVs was in the satisfactory range, with overall GI scores ranging between normal and moderate inflammation, pocket depths ranging from 1 to 2 mm, and recession present in 27% of the evaluated PLVs. No statistically significant difference was found between the mean pocket depths of the restored and unrestored surfaces of veneered teeth ( p≥ 0.136). A moderate correlation was found between GCF and GI.
SUMMARY Purpose: To investigate the effect of different light exposure times, shades, and thicknesses on the depth of cure (DOC) of bulk fill composites. Methods and Materials: Two bulk fill composites, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TBF) and Sonic Fill (SF), and a conventional composite, Filtek Supreme Ultra (FSU), were evaluated. Samples (n=10) were made using two different shades (light and dark), thicknesses (2 and 4 mm) and exposure times (20 and 40 seconds). A Tukon 2100B-testing machine was used to obtain three Knoop hardness numbers (KHNs) measured at the top and bottom of each sample, and DOC was calculated as the bottom/top ratio. Statistical analysis was done using a Student t -test for comparisons between groups with a Bonferroni correction of p < 0.004. Results: Top hardness values ranged from 79.79 to 85.07 for FSU, 69.49 to 91.65 for SF, and 51.01 to 57.82 for TBF. Bottom KHNs ranged from 23.54 to 73.25 for FSU, 45.74 to 77.12 for SF, and 36.95 to 52.51 for TBF. TBF had the lowest overall KHNs. Light-curing exposure time, shade, and material thickness influenced the DOC in most groups, especially at 4-mm depths. A higher bottom/top ratio was achieved when a 40-second cure was compared to a 20-second cure, when light shades were compared to dark shades, and when 2-mm increments were compared to 4-mm increments.
SUMMARY Objective To evaluate polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of two bulk fill flowable composites, one nanohybrid composite modified to a flowable consistency, and one standard flowable composite, comparing the scraping method to the Knoop hardness test. Methods Two bulk fill flowable composites, SureFil SDR flow (SSF) (Dentsply) and Venus Bulk Fill (VBF) (Heraeus Kulzer), one standard flowable, Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable (FSUF) (3M/ESPE) (control), and one regular bulk composite that can be made flowable, SonicFill (SF) (Kerr), were used in this study. For polymerization shrinkage (PS), ten 2-mm samples were made for each composite and cured for 20 seconds and shrinkage was measured with a Kaman linometer. For hardness, ten specimens of each composite were made in a 10 × 10-mm mold and cured for 20 seconds; the bottom surface was scraped according to ISO 4049 specification, and the remaining thickness was measured with a micrometer. Hardness samples were prepared at 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-mm thick ×14-mm diameter, cured for 20 seconds, and polished. After 24 hours of dry storage, a Knoop indenter was applied at 100 g load for 11 seconds. Three readings were made on the top and bottom of each specimen and averaged for each surface to calculate a Knoop hardness value and a bottom/top hardness ratio. One-way analysis of variance and Tukey tests were used to determine significant differences between thicknesses and between test methods for each material. Results PS values were 3.43 ± 0.51%, 3.57 ± 0.63%, 4.4 ± 0.79%, and 1.76 ± 0.53% for FSUF, SSF, VBF, and SF, respectively. VBF showed significantly greater shrinkage (4.4 ± 0.79%), followed by FSUF (3.43 ± 0.51%) and SSF (3.57 ± 0.63%), which were similar, and SF (1.76 ± 0.53%), which had significantly less shrinkage ( p <0.05). Values for the scraping method for depth of cure were significantly greater for SSF and VBF (>5.0 mm), followed by SF (3.46 ± 0.16 mm) and FSU (2.98 ± 0.22 mm). Knoop top hardness values (KHN) were: VBF 21.55 ± 2.39, FSUF 44.62 ± 1.93, SSF 29.17 ± 0.76, and SF 72.56 ± 2.4 at 2 mm and were not significantly different at 3-, 4-, and 5-mm thick within each material. Ratios for bottom/top values (depth of cure) for 2, 3, 4, and 5 mm were: VBF 0.80 ± 0.1, 0.78 ± 0.03, 0.67 ± 0.10, and 0.59 ± 0.07, respectively; SSF 0.74 ± 0.08, 0.72 ± 0.08, 0.69 ± 0.18, and 0.62 ± 0.08, respectively; SF 0.82 ± 0.05, 0.68 ± 0.05, 0.47 ± 0.04, and 0.21 ± 0.02, respectively; and FSUF 0.56 ± 0.08 at 2 mm and 0.40 ± 0.08 at 3 mm. The bottom/top ratio was .80 or less at all depths and decreased below 0.70 at 4-mm depth for VBF and SSF, at 3 mm for SF and at 2 mm for FSUF.