Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases.

W. Scherer, James Kaim, N. Lippman, T. Tagliani, Harmon Cooper

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This study compared the marginal leakage in Class V restorations using three different GIC bases and a composite resin sandwich. The specimens were randomly divided into three equal groups, and the following GIC materials were used as bases: Group I: Ketac-Bond Aplicap; Group II: GC Dentin Cement; Group III: Shofu GlasIonomer Base. The results indicated less microleakage in restorations with a Shofu GlasIonomer Base while no statistical differences were noted between Ketac-Bond Aplicap and GC Dentin Cement.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)61-63
Number of pages3
JournalAmerican Journal of Dentistry
Volume2
Issue number2
StatePublished - Apr 1989

Fingerprint

Glass Ionomer Cements
Composite Resins
Ketac-Bond
GC dentin cement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases. / Scherer, W.; Kaim, James; Lippman, N.; Tagliani, T.; Cooper, Harmon.

In: American Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 2, No. 2, 04.1989, p. 61-63.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Scherer, W, Kaim, J, Lippman, N, Tagliani, T & Cooper, H 1989, 'Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases.', American Journal of Dentistry, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 61-63.
Scherer, W. ; Kaim, James ; Lippman, N. ; Tagliani, T. ; Cooper, Harmon. / Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases. In: American Journal of Dentistry. 1989 ; Vol. 2, No. 2. pp. 61-63.
@article{12e95c04f78e4831951047aa028f349a,
title = "Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases.",
abstract = "This study compared the marginal leakage in Class V restorations using three different GIC bases and a composite resin sandwich. The specimens were randomly divided into three equal groups, and the following GIC materials were used as bases: Group I: Ketac-Bond Aplicap; Group II: GC Dentin Cement; Group III: Shofu GlasIonomer Base. The results indicated less microleakage in restorations with a Shofu GlasIonomer Base while no statistical differences were noted between Ketac-Bond Aplicap and GC Dentin Cement.",
author = "W. Scherer and James Kaim and N. Lippman and T. Tagliani and Harmon Cooper",
year = "1989",
month = "4",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "61--63",
journal = "American Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0894-8275",
publisher = "Mosher and Linder, Inc",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Microleakage of three glass ionomer cement bases.

AU - Scherer, W.

AU - Kaim, James

AU - Lippman, N.

AU - Tagliani, T.

AU - Cooper, Harmon

PY - 1989/4

Y1 - 1989/4

N2 - This study compared the marginal leakage in Class V restorations using three different GIC bases and a composite resin sandwich. The specimens were randomly divided into three equal groups, and the following GIC materials were used as bases: Group I: Ketac-Bond Aplicap; Group II: GC Dentin Cement; Group III: Shofu GlasIonomer Base. The results indicated less microleakage in restorations with a Shofu GlasIonomer Base while no statistical differences were noted between Ketac-Bond Aplicap and GC Dentin Cement.

AB - This study compared the marginal leakage in Class V restorations using three different GIC bases and a composite resin sandwich. The specimens were randomly divided into three equal groups, and the following GIC materials were used as bases: Group I: Ketac-Bond Aplicap; Group II: GC Dentin Cement; Group III: Shofu GlasIonomer Base. The results indicated less microleakage in restorations with a Shofu GlasIonomer Base while no statistical differences were noted between Ketac-Bond Aplicap and GC Dentin Cement.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024644494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024644494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 2

SP - 61

EP - 63

JO - American Journal of Dentistry

JF - American Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0894-8275

IS - 2

ER -