Iranian Journal of Radiology

Published by: Kowsar

Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging Affect the Microleakage of Amalgam Restorations?

Ozlem Marti Akgun 1 , * , Gunseli GuvenPolat 1 , Ahmet TuranIllca 2 , Ceren Yildirim 1 , Pervin Demir 3 and Feridun Basak 1
Authors Information
1 Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Gulhane Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey
2 Department of Radiology, Izmir Mevki Military Hospital, Izmir, Turkey
3 Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, YildirimBeyazit University, Ankara, Turkey
Article information
  • Iranian Journal of Radiology: August 01, 2014, 11 (3); e15565
  • Published Online: August 1, 2014
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: October 22, 2013
  • Revised: January 27, 2014
  • DOI: 10.5812/iranjradiol.15565

To Cite: Marti Akgun O, GuvenPolat G, TuranIllca A, Yildirim C, Demir P, et al. Does Magnetic Resonance Imaging Affect the Microleakage of Amalgam Restorations?, Iran J Radiol. 2014 ; 11(3):e15565. doi: 10.5812/iranjradiol.15565.

Copyright © 2014, Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Iranian Society of Radiology. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Objectives
3. Materials and Methods
4. Results
5. Discussion
  • 1. Colon P, Pradelle-Plasse N, Galland J. Evaluation of the long-term corrosion behavior of dental amalgams: influence of palladium addition and particle morphology. Dent Mater. 2003; 19(3): 232-9[PubMed]
  • 2. Andrews JT, Hembree JH, Jr. In vitro evaluation of marginal leakage of corrosion-resistant amalgam alloy. ASDC J Dent Child. 1975; 42(5): 367-70[PubMed]
  • 3. Derkson GD, Pashley DH, Derkson ME. Microleakage measurement of selected restorative materials: a new in vitro method. J Prosthet Dent. 1986; 56(4): 435-40[PubMed]
  • 4. Parolia A, Kundabala M, Gupta V, Verma M, Batra C, Shenoy R, et al. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive agents with dye under vacuum: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2011; 22(2): 252-5[DOI][PubMed]
  • 5. Staninec M, Setcos JC. Bonded amalgam restorations: current research and clinical procedure. Dent Update. 2003; 30(8): 430-4[PubMed]
  • 6. Berger A. Magnetic resonance imaging. How does it work? BMJ. 2002; 5(35)
  • 7. Schenck JF. Safety of strong, static magnetic fields. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000; 12(1): 2-19[PubMed]
  • 8. Shahidi SH, Bronoosh P, Alavi AA, Zamiri B, Sadeghi AR, Bagheri MH, et al. Effect of magnetic resonance imaging on microleakage of amalgam restorations: an in vitro study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2009; 38(7): 470-4[DOI][PubMed]
  • 9. Yilmaz S, Misirlioglu M. The effect of 3 T MRI on microleakage of amalgam restorations. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013; 42(8): 20130072[DOI][PubMed]
  • 10. Tymofiyeva O, Vaegler S, Rottner K, Boldt J, Hopfgartner AJ, Proff PC, et al. Influence of dental materials on dental MRI. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2013; 42(6): 20120271[DOI][PubMed]
  • 11. Klinke T, Daboul A, Maron J, Gredes T, Puls R, Jaghsi A, et al. Artifacts in magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography caused by dental materials. PLoS One. 2012; 7(2)[DOI][PubMed]
  • 12. Starcukova J, Starcuk Z, Jr, Hubalkova H, Linetskiy I. Magnetic susceptibility and electrical conductivity of metallic dental materials and their impact on MR imaging artifacts. Dent Mater. 2008; 24(6): 715-23[DOI][PubMed]
  • 13. Eggers G, Rieker M, Kress B, Fiebach J, Dickhaus H, Hassfeld S. Artefacts in magnetic resonance imaging caused by dental material. MAGMA. 2005; 18(2): 103-11[DOI][PubMed]
  • 14. Muller-Miny H, Erber D, Moller H, Muller-Miny B, Bongartz G. Is there a hazard to health by mercury exposure from amalgam due to MRI? J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996; 6(1): 258-60[PubMed]
  • 15. Mortazavi SM, Daiee E, Yazdi A, Khiabani K, Kavousi A, Vazirinejad R, et al. Mercury release from dental amalgam restorations after magnetic resonance imaging and following mobile phone use. Pak J Biol Sci. 2008; 11(8): 1142-6[PubMed]
  • 16. Kidd EA. Microleakage: a review. J Dent. 1976; 4(5): 199-206[PubMed]
  • 17. Eick JD, Welch FH. Polymerization shrinkage of posterior composite resins and its possible influence on postoperative sensitivity. Quintessence Int. 1986; 17(2): 103-11[PubMed]
  • 18. Krejci I, Lutz F. Marginal adaptation of Class V restorations using different restorative techniques. J Dent. 1991; 19(1): 24-32[PubMed]
  • 19. Tig IA, Fodor O, Moldovan M. Observation of Classical and Bonded Amalgam Restorations 2005;
  • 20. Ziskind D, Venezia E, Kreisman I, Mass E. Amalgam type, adhesive system, and storage period as influencing factors on microleakage of amalgam restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 90(3): 255-60[DOI][PubMed]
  • 21. Fedorowicz Z, Nasser M, Wilson N. Adhesively bonded versus non-bonded amalgam restorations for dental caries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009; (4)[DOI][PubMed]
  • 22. Murad M. No available evidence to assess the effectiveness of bonded amalgams. Evid Based Dent. 2009; 10(4): 106[DOI][PubMed]
  • 23. Jakovljevic A, Pesic D, Popovic M, Melih I. [Influence of different bonding agents on marginal sealing quality of amalgam restorations]. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2011; 139(11-12): 722-7[PubMed]
  • 24. Sharafeddin F, Moradian H. Microleakage of Class II Combined Amalgam-Composite Restorations Using Different Composites and Bonding Agents. J Dent Teh Univ Med Sci. 2008; 5: 126-30
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments