Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 144
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 37-41

Comparative evaluation of two different isolation techniques in restoration of noncarious cervical lesions using flowable composite: A split-mouth in vivo study

1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India
2 Department of Government Dental College and Hospital, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
Jyothsna Kasireddy
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Government Dental College and Hospital, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jorr.jorr_4_21

Rights and Permissions

Context: Proper method of isolation plays a key role in the restoration of noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs). Aims: The aim of this in vivo study was to compare the efficacy of two isolation techniques in restoring NCCLs using flowable composite. Settings and Design: Forty patients who fulfill the inclusion criteria were selected based on the power of the study (0.86). The participants were divided into two groups according to the split-mouth design. Materials and Methods: In Group A, lesion isolation was done using the Mylar matrix band with photocurable gingival barrier, and in Group B, using Metal matrix band and gingival barrier. The restorations were assessed immediately and after 6 months, using modified US Public Health Service criteria: marginal integrity, marginal discoloration, wear, retention, secondary caries, and postoperative sensitivity. Statistical Analysis: IBM SPSS (version 21.0) software was used. McNemar's and Chi-square tests were performed, considering P < 0.05 for statistical significance. Results: Both the groups demonstrated satisfactory clinical performance. Upon inter- and intragroup comparison of the two isolation methods, there was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). Conclusions: Within the limitations of the study, both the groups performed similarly in isolation of NCCLs. However, long-term clinical studies must be needed for further evaluation.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded35    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal