الفهرس 
ABSTRACTOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 98 |  |  |
| | | from | 98 | | |
Abstract
Aim: Evaluation of ion release, apatite formation and tooth-restoration interface of a commercial bioactive restoration (ACTIVA™ bioactive restorative) compared to the conventional (Filtek™ Z350-XT) one.
Methodology: Twenty discs were prepared in this study for ion release and apatite formation tests. While for tooth-restoration interface examination, ten resin composite restorations were used to fill ten Class V cavities prepared in buccal and lingual surfaces of five sound freshly extracted human molars. The specimens and restorations were divided into two groups according to the type of the material used; group I: Conventional resin composite (Filtek™ Z350-XT, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) as a control group and group II: Bioactive restorative material (ACTIVA, BioACTIVE, Pulpdent, USA). For the assessment of calcium and phosphorous ions release, each specimen was immersed in distilled water for 14 days and ions were analyzed via Inductively coupled plasma, (n=5/group). To examine apatite formation, discs were immersed in phosphate buffer saline for 14 days then analysis was performed using scanning electron microscope (SEM) and Energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX), (n=5/group). Calcium/Phosphorous ratio was calculated. Class V cavities were performed on buccal and lingual surfaces of five teeth and then sectioned. Sections were immersed in phosphate buffer saline for 14 days. The teeth-restorations interfaces were examined and the gap distance at the interface was measured using SEM.
Results: Regarding ion release, mean Ca ions values were 29.32ppm and 30.06ppm for (Filtek™ Z350-XT) and (ACTIVA™ bioactive restorative) respectively with no significant difference between them.
vii
While for the P ion release mean values were 0 ppm and 1.18ppm for (Filtek™ Z350-XT) and (ACTIVA™ bioactive restorative) respectively with a significant difference between them. The SEM micrographs for (Filtek™ Z350-XT) showed homogenous discs̕surfaces while (ACTIVA™ bioactive restorative) showed white globules on discs̕surfaces with Ca/P ratio=1.7. Gaps were detected between the teeth structure and (Filtek™ Z350-XT) restorations without any crystals at the interface. For (ACTIVA™ bioactive restorative), gaps were also detected at the interface, yet crystal-like structure began formation at the gaps borders. No significant difference in the gap distance between groups.
Conclusions: ACTIVA bioactive restorative material seems promising in ions release and apatite formation yet closing the gap at the interface may need long term inspection duration.