Effects of different removal methods of excess resin adhesive on the microleakage of alumina all-ceramic crowns

• Published in: BMC oral health 2023-11, Vol.23 (1), p.1-854, Article 854
• Main Authors: Zhang, Haiyang, Yu, Hao, Jiang, Shangfei, Dong, Haidao, Yan, Chengdong, Liu, Hong, Li, Qing, Jiang, Haiwei
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation; Adhesives; Aesthetics; Aging; All-ceramic crown; Aluminum oxide; Bond strength; Cement; Clinical medicine; Cold; Crowns (Dentistry); Dental acrylic resins; Dental caries; Dental cement; Dental resins; Excess removal; Marginal clearance; Medical research; Medicine, Experimental; Methods; Microleakage; Molars; Quality management; Resin cement; Teeth; Thermal cycling
• ISSN: 1472-6831; 1472-6831
• DOI: 10.1186/s12903-023-03581-z

Background Microleakage is a common problem that affects the quality and longevity of all-ceramic crowns. It is influenced by factors such as the resin cement, crown margin design and curing technique. However, few studies focus on the effect of different methods of removing excess resin adhesive on the microleakage of all-ceramic crowns. This study aimed to compare two methods of removing excess resin adhesive (the small brush and sickle methods) on the microleakage of all-ceramic crowns with different marginal clearances. Methods Forty extracted third molars were prepared with a 90[degrees] shoulder margin and randomly divided into four groups according to their marginal lift (30, 60, 90 or 0 [mu]m). Procera alumina crowns were fabricated using computer-aided design/computer-aided modelling and cemented onto the teeth with 3 M RelyX Unicem (3 M Company, United States) resin cement. Excess resin cement was removed by either the small brush or the sickle scalpel method. The marginal adaptation was observed with a digital microscope. After thermal cycling of the teeth, microleakage was assessed using the dye penetration test under a stereomicroscope. The Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis H test were used to compare the microleakage scores among different groups. Results The small-brush group showed significantly better marginal adaptation and lower microleakage scores than the sickle group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the microleakage score (grade 0) among different marginal clearances within each group (p > 0.05). Conclusion The small-brush method was more effective than the sickle scalpel method in reducing the microleakage of all-ceramic crowns with different marginal clearances. This method can improve the marginal adaptation and sealability of all-ceramic crowns, thus preventing secondary caries and other complications. Keywords: Microleakage, All-ceramic crown, Resin cement, Excess removal, Marginal clearance