Cavities prepared with CVD diamond at ultra-sonic

Objectives: the purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of class V cavities prepared with diamond burs operated at high speed(GI) and CVD diamond at ultra-sonic (GII), restored with tree kinds of materials.

Methods: a hundred and thirty noncarious human molars stored in 0,9% saline solution were randonly divided into 2 groups (GI and GII) with 65 specimens each. Cl V preparation (2mmx3mmX2mm) were made at B and L surfaces. The oclusal margin was located on enamel and the gingival margin was located on dentin. The 2 groups were divided into 13 sub-groups with 5 tooth and 10 restorations each and cavities restored with composite resin - GIA and GIIA - (GIA1 control, GIA2, GIA3, GIIA1, GIIA2,GIIA3), glass ionomer - GIB and GIIB - (GIB1control, GIB2, GIB3, GIB4, GIIB1, GIIB2, GIIB3, GIIB4) and amalgam – GIC and GIIC- (GIC1control, GIC2, GIC3, GIC4, GIC5, GIC6, GIIC1, GIIC2, GIIC3, GIIC4, GIIC5, GIIC6). Samples were stored in water at 37ºC for 24 hours, coated with nail varnish except 1 mm around the restorations and immersed in silver nitrate, 50% for 8 hours. The restorations were then washed, “Photoflood” lamp exposed and L-B sections obtained. The deep of dye penetration was scored from zero (no leakage) to 3 (maximum leakage). Results were available for three evaluators. The Kruskal Wallis test were used to compare the various groups (p< 0,05). Results: no significant differences were found between GIA and GIIA and GIC and GIIC. GIB and GIIB showed differences statistically significant among the materials, at oclusal and gingival margin.

Conclusion: we conclude that CVD diamond used at ultra-sonic is a promising technic, showing good results.