Influence of flowable liner and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites

This in vitro study evaluated gingival wall microleakage in packable and microhybrid conventional composite restorations with and without a flowable composite liner. Each group was evaluated with gingival margins situated in both enamel and cementum/dentin. Two hundred and forty Class II cavities were prepared in extracted third molars, half with gingival margins in enamel and half with margins in dentin/cementum. In groups of 30, restoration was undertaken with packable alone (3M Filtek P60), conventional alone (3M Z250), packable plus flowable liner (3M Filtek Flow) and conventional plus flowable liner. All used 37% phosphoric acid etch and Scotchbond 1 (3M) as the bonding system. After restoration, the teeth were thermocycled (between 5 degrees C, 37 degrees C and 60 degrees C) 1,500 times, soaked in 0.1% methylene blue, sectioned and microleakage from the gingival margin scored. Statistical analysis was performed using Kruskal Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. There was no significant difference between systems in terms of leakage scores when gingival margins were situated in enamel (p=0.70). All restorations with margins in cementum/dentin leaked significantly more than those with margins in enamel (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between leakage scores of 3M Z250 and Filtek P60 with cementum/dentin gingival margins (p=0.68). Use of a flowable composite liner (3M Filtek Flow) against cementum/dentin was associated with increased microleakage (p<0.001). In this study, leakage scores suggest that gingival margins should be placed in enamel. The conventional and packable resin composites tested were not associated with differences in microleakage. Leakage data do not support the use of flowable resin composite linings in Class II resin composite restorations.     

In vitro evaluation of microleakage of a flowable composite in Class V restorations

The aim of this study was to evaluate microleakage around class V restorations using a flowable composite compared to a hybrid composite. Forty class V cavities were prepared on buccal and lingual surfaces of 20 human teeth, with occlusal and cervical margins at the enamel and cementum/dentin levels, respectively. Specimens were divided into 2 groups with 10 samples each. Group 1: buccal cavities received Paama 2 (conventional bonding agent) + Wave (flowable composite); lingual cavities were restored with Paama 2 + Glacier (hybrid composite). Group 2: buccal cavities received Optibond Solo (self-priming bonding agent) + Wave; lingual cavities were restored with Optibond Solo + Glacier. After being stored in distilled water and finished, the teeth were thermocycled, immersed in a 50% silver nitrate solution and embedded in resin. They were sectioned and the depth of tracer penetration was scored. The results were analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests. The restorations with flowable composite and those with hybrid composite from the same group showed similar results of microleakage for both occlusal and cervical margins. Optibond Solo improved the sealing of the restorations when compared with Paama 2 (p < 0.01). None of the restorative materials completely sealed the tooth/restoration interface at the cervical margins.     

Microleakage in MOD resin composite with three dentin bonding agents

The extent of microleakage under MOD composites was studied when an aluminum oxalate dentin bonding agent (Tenure), a phosphonated resin bonding agent (Bondlite), and a glass-ionomer cement (Ketac Silver) were used. Three groups of 10 extracted molars were prepared with MOD cavities; one box ended on enamel, the other on cementum. In Group 1, Bondlite was applied to dentin and etched enamel before the sample was restored with a light-cured hybrid composite. In Group 2, a 2-mm increment of Ketac Silver was placed in each box before Bondlite and composite. In Group 3, Tenure was applied to dentin before being restored. Teeth were thermal-cycled, stained in silver nitrate, sectioned, and scored for microleakage. Microleakage along the gingival floor was significantly less at enamel margins than at cementum margins in all three groups. All groups showed severe marginal microleakage on cementum.     

Composite restorations: influence of flowable and self-curing resin composite linings on microleakage in vitro

This in vitro study evaluated the microleakage at enamel (occlusal) and dentin (gingival) margins of MOD resin composite restorations made with different incremental insertion techniques. MOD cavities were prepared on 60 extracted human molars with the proximal margins placed 1 mm below the cemento-enamel junction. All teeth were acid-etched and treated with One-Step adhesive, then restored with a hybrid resin composite (Renew) with and without a flowable composite (AEliteflo) or a self-curing composite (Bisfil 2B) as the first increment in the proximal boxes. The time of placement of the second increment in relation to curing of the first increment was also varied. After polishing, the teeth were soaked in 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours, sectioned and evaluated for dye penetration. None of the restorative techniques prevented microleakage at the enamel and dentin margins. However, microleakage at dentin margins were significantly reduced by the use of a flowable composite as the first increment in the proximal boxes. Time of placement in relation to curing had no influence on microleakage. Microleakage was lower at enamel margins than at dentin margins; however, besides microleakage at the enamel-restoration interface, 37 of the 60 restored teeth (62%) displayed at least one white line in enamel adjacent to the composite restoration.     

Microleakage in class V gingiva-shaded composite resin restorations

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the microleakage in Class V cavities restored with a new gingiva-shaded microhybrid composite resin and with a conventional microhybrid composite resin using three different dentin bonding systems (DBS). Class V cavities were prepared in sixty freshly extracted human teeth with the incisal margin in enamel and the apical margin in dentin/cementum. Restored specimens, after thermocycling, were placed in 2% methylene blue solution for 24 hours. Longitudinal sections were obtained and studied with a stereomicroscope for assessment of the microleakage according to degree of dye penetration (scale 0-3). Data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis test and with Mann-Whitney U-test.IN THIS STUDY THERE WAS NO LEAKAGE IN ENAMEL: all the cavities showed no dye penetration at the incisal margins (located in enamel). None of the DBS used eliminated microleakage in apical margins (located in dentin or cementum): three-step total-etch and single-step self-etch were more effective in reducing microleakage in dentin margins when compared with two-step total-etch. This in vitro study concluded that microleakage in Class V cavities restored with the composite resins tested is similar.     

In vitro evaluation of microleakage of indirect composite inlays cemented with four luting agents

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Microleakage around dental restorations is implicated in the occurrence of secondary carious lesions, adverse pulpal response, and reduced restoration longevity. PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microleakage of indirect resin composite inlays cemented with 4 luting agents. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Standardized Class V inlay preparations overlapping the cemento-enamel junction were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 extracted human mandibular third molars. Eighty postpolymerized, heat-treated resin composite inlays (Targis, 72 specimens, 8 controls) were processed in stone replicas and cemented into the preparations using 4 luting agents (n = 18 + 2 controls for each cement group): a resin composite used with a bonding agent (Variolink II/Excite), a resin composite used with a self-etching primer, but without bonding agent (Panavia F/ED Primer), a modified resin composite used with a bonding agent (Resinomer/One Step), and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Fuji Plus). Thirty-six inlays (n = 9 + 1 control) were subjected to thermal cycling (2000 cycles, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C), whereas the other 36 were not. All the teeth were then immersed in 1% methylene blue dye solution for 48 hours. Microleakage score, margin location (enamel/cementum), thermal cycling history, and preparation location (buccal/lingual) were analyzed using a multivariate model (alpha = .05). Multivariate analysis was performed using a polychotomous logistic regression. RESULTS: The preparation location had no significant effect on dye penetration. The margin location (enamel or cementum) and the thermal cycling had a significant effect on microleakage (odds ratios [ORs] = 17.6 and 8.04, respectively). In comparing the 3 resin-based luting agents (Variolink II, Panavia F, and Resinomer) to Fuji Plus, Panavia F exhibited the lowest significant overall microleakage (OR = 0.09), followed by Variolink II (significant OR equal to 0.43), whereas Resinomer demonstrated the greatest significant overall microleakage (OR = 1.35). CONCLUSION: Within the experimental conditions of this in vitro study, thermal cycling significantly increased microleakage (OR = 8.04). The overall microleakage at the enamel margins was significantly lower than the overall microleakage at the cementum margins for the 4 luting agents tested (OR = 17.6).     

Effect of dentin deproteinization on microleakage of Class V composite restorations

The role of the collagen fibers in dentin adhesion has not clearly been established. Therefore, this laboratory study evaluated the microleakage at resin-dentin and resin-enamel interfaces of Class V composite restorations after etching enamel and dentin with phosphoric acid (H3PO4) or after etching with H3PO4 followed by deproteinization with 5% sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) to prevent the formation of a hybrid layer. Ten extracted human molars were used to prepare standardized Class V cavities on both buccal and lingual surfaces. The teeth were randomly divided in two groups: 1) Class V cavities that were etched with H3PO4 for 15 seconds; b) Class V cavities that were etched with H3PO4 for 15 seconds followed by collagen removal with 5% NaOCl for two minutes. The cavities were restored using the Prime & Bond 2.1 bonding system and TPH resin composite. The specimens were stored in water for 24 hours at 37 degrees C and thermocycled 500 times between water baths kept at 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. After thermocycling, specimens were immersed in a 0.5% aqueous solution of basic fuchsin for 24 hours. Three longitudinal sections of each restoration were obtained and examined with a stereomicroscope for qualitative evaluation of microleakage. The data were statistically analyzed by Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon matched pairs signed ranked tests. Extra specimens were analyzed with the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Occlusal margins (enamel margins) resulted in statistical lower degree of leakage than gingival margins (dentin/cementum margins) in both treatment groups. For each type of margin, there were no statistically significant differences between the etched and the etched and deproteinized groups. Under the SEM, occlusal surfaces showed no detachment between enamel and dentin, while dentin/cementum resulted in gap formation.     

The effect of fiber placement or flowable resin lining on microleakage in Class II adhesive restorations

PURPOSE: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of two fibers (polyethylene or glass) and a flowable resin liner on microleakage in Class II adhesive restorations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Class II adhesive cavities were prepared on mesial and distal surfaces of 40 extracted sound human molars. The cavity margins were below or above the CEJ. The teeth were randomly divided into four groups according to the restoration technique: group 1: restored with a resin composite (AP-X, Kuraray) in bulk after SE Bond (Kuraray) treatment; group 2: flowable resin liner (Protect Liner F, Kuraray) was used before composite restoration; in group 3, a polyethylene fiber (Ribbond) and in group 4, a glass fiber (everStick NET, StickTech) was placed into the bed of flowable resin before composite restoration. Samples were finished, stored in distilled water for 7 days at room temperature, and then thermocycled for 300 cycles between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C. After sealing the apices, the teeth were varnished within 1 mm of the margins and placed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 h at 37 degrees C. After rinsing, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally through the restorations and microleakage was evaluated with a stereomicroscope. Marginal penetration was scored on a 0 to 4 scale, and the data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and the Mann-Whitney U-test. RESULTS: Flowable resin, everStick NET, and Ribbond THM used in combination with flowable resin significantly reduced leakage at occlusal margins in cavities with enamel margins (p < 0.05). When the leakage values on cervical dentin margins were evaluated, there was no statistically significant difference among the tested groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Use of flowable composite alone or in combination with polyethylene or glass fibers reduces occlusal leakage in Class II adhesive cavities with enamel margins.     

The marginal seal of Class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow) versus an injectable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) on microleakage at the cavosurface margin of the proximal box of Class II restorations in permanent teeth in-vitro. Thirty caries and restoration-free human bicuspids were prepared with mesial and distal slot preparations and were filled either with a bonding agent (Optibond) plus a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow), Group I; bonding agent (Optibond) plus a flowable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC), Group II; or a flowable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) with no bonding agent, Group III. All specimens were then immersed in a 2% solution of basic fuschin dye for 24 hours to allow for dye penetration into possible existing gaps. These teeth were then carefully sectioned mesially/distally into two pieces using an Isomet saw. The teeth were then studied under a binocular microscope to measure depths of dye penetrations as an indication of marginal microleakage at the gingival cavosurface margin and scored as follows: 0 = no dye penetration, 1 = dye penetration into enamel only, 2 = dye penetration into enamel and dentin, 3 = dye penetration into the pulp. The specimens were also evaluated using a SEM. The results showed that there were statistically significant differences between Groups I (Tetric Flow) and (Fuji II LC plus bonding agent), II in favor of Group I; between Groups I and (Fuji II LC with no bonding agent), III in favor of Group I; as well as Groups II and III in favor of Group II (Fuji II LC plus bonding agent). Group I (bonding agent plus flowable composite resin) showed significantly less microleakage. Group II (bonding agent plus flowable glass ionomer) demonstrated a bond that existed between the bonding agent and the glass ionomer but microleakage within microgaps of the glass ionomer itself Group III (flowable glass ionomer plus no bonding agent) demonstrated significant microleakage between the glass ionomer and tooth structure, microgaps within the glass ionomer, and lack of retention of the restoration. It appears that the use of a flowable composite resin (Tetric Flow) plus a bonding agent (Optibond) in the proximal box of a Class II restoration in permanent teeth will significantly reduce the microleakage at the cavosurface margin when compared with an injectable glass ionomer (Fuji II LC) with or without a bonding agent (Optibond).     

Microleakage of a condensable resin composite: an in vitro investigation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate microleakage in Class II cavities restored with the condensable resin composite SureFil, placed with or without a liner and 1 of 2 different dentin bonding agents. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Extracted noncarious human teeth were randomly divided into 4 groups of 15 each and restored according to manufacturer's instructions: group 1, SureFil and Prime & Bond NT; group 2, SureFil and PQ1; group 3, SureFil, PermaFlow, and PQ1; group 4, Heliomolar and Syntac Single-Component (control). Specimens were stored in 37 degrees C water for 24 hours. All specimens were thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 500 cycles. Each specimen was immersed in 0.2% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours and then sectioned longitudinally and horizontally. Dye penetration at enamel and cementum margins were viewed at x30 magnification by 2 independent, calibrated evaluators. Specimens exhibiting dye penetration > or = 0.1 mm beyond the cavosurface margin were considered to have leakage. RESULTS: Chi-square tests revealed no statistically significant differences in the presence of microleakage when all groups were analyzed together. However, 2 by 2 comparisons revealed that group 3 had significantly fewer specimens with microleakage than did group 1, 2, or 4. CONCLUSION: To limit microleakage, a flowable composite should be used as a liner when a condensable composite material is used.     

Comparison of microleakage of three acid-base luting cements versus one resin-bonded cement for Class V direct composite inlays

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Demineralized dentin beneath set cement may adversely affect microleakage under fixed restorations. PURPOSE: Microleakage of direct composite inlays cemented with acid-base cements and a methyl methacrylate resin cement were evaluated to determine their effect on the integrity of the underlying hybridized dentin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty Class V box preparations (3 mm x 3 mm x 1.5 mm) were precisely prepared in previously frozen bovine teeth with one margin in enamel and another margin in dentin. Direct composite inlays (EPIC-TMPT) for each preparation were divided into 4 groups of 15 specimens each and cemented with 3 acid-base cements (control group): Elite, Ketac-Cem, Hy-Bond Carbo-Cem, and 1 adhesive resin cement: C&B Metabond. All specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours at 37 degrees C before immersion in 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours. The dye penetration was measured on the sectioned specimens at the tooth-cement interface of enamel and cementum margins and recorded with graded criteria under light microscopy (Olympus Vanox-T) at original magnification x 50, 100, and 200. A Kruskal-Wallis and the Mann-Whitney test at P<.05 were used to analyze leakage score. RESULTS: All cementum margins of the 3 acid-base cements tested demonstrated significantly higher leakage scores than cementum margins for inlays cemented with the resin cement tested(P<.01). No leakage along the tooth-cement interface was found for inlays retained with the adhesive resin cement. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, the 3 acid-base cements tested exhibited greater microleakage at the cementum margins than did the adhesive resin cement that was tested.     

The effect of different types of flowable restorative resins on microleakage of Class V cavities

This study evaluated the microleakage of Class V cavities restored with three different types of flowable resin restorative material and compared the effects of using their respective manufacturer's dentin adhesive or a different brand. Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and the gingival margin in dentin were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 48 non-carious human molars. The teeth were randomly assigned to three equal groups of 16. The first eight teeth in each group were restored with one of the flowable restorative materials (Filtek Flow, Dyract Flow, Admira Flow) using the manufacturer's recommended dentin adhesive (Single Bond, Prime & Bond NT, Admira Bond), and the remaining eight molars were restored using a different brand of dentin adhesive (Gluma Comfort Bond). The samples were thermocycled 200 times (5 degrees C-55 degrees C) with a one-minute dwell time. They were then immersed in a 2% basic fuchsin solution for 24 hours, sectioned and analyzed by stereomicroscopy. There was no statistically significant difference at the occlusal margins for either restoration used with its respective dentin adhesive. At the gingival margins, there was a significant difference among all groups. Flowable ormocer (Admira Flow/Admira Bond) displayed the least leakage at the gingival margins. When these flowable restoratives were used with a different brand of dentin adhesive, statistically significant differences were observed both on enamel and dentin. None of the restoratives tested fully prevented leakage at the gingival margins. No significant differences in microleakage were observed among the restorative materials used with respect to the manufacturer's dentin adhesive or a different brand except for Admira Flow restorative at the gingival margins. The gingival margins had significantly more microleakage than the occlusal margins (p < 0.05) except in the Admira Flow group, where microleakage at the occlusal and gingival margins was almost equal.     

Microleakage of light-cured resin and resin-modified glass-ionomer dentin bonding agents applied with co-cure vs pre-cure technique

This in vitro study evaluated the effect of dentin bonding agents in reducing microleakage after three months in Class V restorations restored with Z100 resin composite. Materials tested were three types of resin-based dentin bonding agents: a multi-step (Scotchbond Multi-Purpose); a one-step (Scotchbond One-Step); a self-etching, self-priming (Clearfil Liner Bond) and a resin-modified glass ionomer (GC Fuji Bond LC). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in cementum were prepared both on labial and lingual surfaces of extracted premolar teeth. Restorations (two per tooth) were distributed randomly into nine test groups (n = 10) consisting of the various DBAs applied with co-cure and pre-cure techniques, and no dentin bonding as a negative control group. Samples were stored in saline for three months, thermocycled, stained with silver nitrate, then sectioned through the middle of the preparation to facilitate the removal of the composite resin restoration. For groups treated with the pre-cure technique, the differences between the enamel leakage values of SBMP-control, CFLB-control and SB1S-control subgroups were significant (p < 0.05). For enamel leakage values of groups treated with the co-cure technique, the differences between the SBMP-control, SB1S-control, CFLB-control and Fuji LC-control subgroups were significant (p < 0.05). For cementum leakage values of groups treated with pre-cure technique, the difference between the CFLB-control and the Fuji, SBMP and SB1S groups was significant (p < 0.05). No significant differences could be detected between the cementum leakage values of groups treated with the co-cure technique (p > 0.05). The differences between the values obtained with application of CFLB with the pre-cure and co-cure techniques at the cementum margins were found to be statistically significant (p = 0.02). No statistically significant differences could be detected between the pre-cure and co-cure values of the other test materials. Generally for every group, cementum microleakage values were greater than enamel microleakage values (p < 0.05). The use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, Scotchbond One-Step and Fuji Bond LC with the co-cure technique to decrease the application time did not cause any significant increase in microleakage. Only pre-curing using Clearfil Liner Bond provided better microleakage properties than the other pre-cured adhesives.     

Technical note: fluoride pre-treatment effects on microleakage of a resin bonding agent

This pilot study reports the effect of fluoride pre-treatment of dentin and enamel on microleakage of a resin bonding agent. Pairs of circular class V cavities involving 50% enamel and 50% cementum were cut in 12 extracted third molars. Each tooth contained a control and a treatment cavity (matched-pair design). A stannous fluoride solution (0.717% SnF2, Gel-Kam, Scherer Laboratories, Dallas, TX) was applied to the entire treatment preparation of each tooth. A dentin resin bonding system (Scotchbond 2 with Scotchprep, a dentin primer, 3M Dental Products Div., St. Paul, MN) was applied per manufacturer's instructions. Silux resin (3M) was placed over the resin bonding agent, light-cured, and finished. The teeth were subjected to 500 temperature cycles between 5 and 55 degrees C. A silver nitrate staining technique was used for evaluation of microleakage. The mean leakage for the control was 2235 +/- 1146 microns, and 2105 +/- 1052 microns for the fluoride treatment sites. It is concluded, from this pilot study with small sample size, that pre-treatment with fluoride of dentin and enamel prior to the placement of a resin bonding agent produced no significant change in microleakage (Student's t test for paired samples, p = 0.6492).     

Microleakage of composite restorations bonded with three new dentin bonding agents.

This report evaluates the impact of two dentin bonding techniques on microleakage of Class V restorations bonded with three new dentin bonding systems. Forty-eight extracted human premolar and molar teeth were randomly assigned to four groups for bonding with EBS Bonding System (ESPE, Seefeld, Germany); Syntac Single-Component (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein); Scotchbond 1 (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, Minnesota); and a control, Prime and Bond 2.1 (Dentsply, DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany). Cavities were cut in both the buccal and lingual surfaces. The coronal half of each preparation was in enamel, and the gingival half was in cementum or dentin. The cavities were restored with composite after the application of dentin bonding agents, using two different drying techniques for each material. The teeth were stored in distilled water for 6 days at 37 degrees C and then thermocycled. The restorations were examined microscopically for leakage, using Procion brilliant red as a marker. All groups showed microleakage at both the enamel and dentin margins. At the gingival margin, there was no significant difference between any of the experimental materials and the control for either wet bonding (Kruskal-Wallis: p = .8920) or dry bonding (Kruskal-Wallis: p .9973); or between the two techniques for each material (Mann-Whitney U in all cases p > .05). Scanning electron microscopic examination confirmed that the zones of microleakage, as indicated by dye penetration, were principally resincohesive failures within the collagen-rich hybrid layer. Three water-based bonding agents were unable to prevent microleakage at either the enamel or dentin margins of Class V cavities regardless of which bonding technique was employed. All systems behaved equally.     

Microleakage of direct and indirect composite restorations with three dentin bonding agents

This study evaluated the marginal sealing ability of direct and indirect (inlay) resin composite restorations with three dentin bonding systems. Forty-eight freshly extracted bovine incisor teeth were randomly assigned to four groups for bonding with Syntac Single-Component, Excite (Vivadent, Liechtenstein), ScotchBond Multi-Purpose Plus (3M Dental Products, St Paul, MN 55144, USA) and a control with no bonding agents. Class V cavities were cut in both buccal and lingual surfaces. The coronal half of each preparation was in enamel and the gingival half was in cementum or dentin. Half of the specimens in each group were restored with direct and the remainder with indirect technique. The teeth were stored in 37 degrees C water for 30 days, then thermocycled. After immersion in 0.5% basic fuchsin, the teeth were cut faciolingually and evaluated for dye penetration using a binocular stereomicroscope. There was no significant difference among the bonding systems for either the direct or indirect technique or between the two techniques used for each system, however, the indirect technique showed significantly (p = 0.001) less microleakage than the direct technique in control groups. All groups showed more leakage at the cementum margins except Excite with direct technique, where microleakage at the incisal and gingival margins was almost equal.     

Repair of non-carious amalgam margin defects

This study investigated the microleakage associated with the repair of non-carious amalgam defects using flowable resin composite. Occlusal amalgam preparations were accomplished on 36 non-carious mandibular molars. A standardized 40-micron marginal defect was made by condensing amalgam against a mylar matrix strip. Specimens then underwent a corrosion protocol designed to simulate intraoral corrosion seen with amalgam restorations. The resultant specimens were divided into three treatment groups: 1) No treatment (control); 2) Air abrasion of the amalgam defect surface, acid etching of both amalgam and enamel surfaces, then placement of a flowable composite and 3) Air abrasion of the amalgam defect, application of a fifth-generation dentin bonding agent and placement of the flowable composite. Specimens were thermocycled, sealed with glass ionomer and fingernail polish to within 1 mm of repaired margins, then immersed in basic fuchsin for 24 hours. Specimens were sectioned and microleakage assessed. Results indicated that a flowable resin composite significantly reduced marginal microleakage compared to the control (p < 0.05). There was no difference in microleakage between flowable resin composite repairs done with or without the use of a dentin-bonding agent.     

Penetration of radiocalcium at the margins of resin and glass ionomer dentine bonding agents in primary and permanent teeth

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the leakage of three resin dentine bonding agents (Prime and Bond, Scotchbond Multi-Purpose, Probond) and a glass ionomer dentine bonding agent (GC Fujibond LC), in cervical cavities prepared in primary and permanent molar teeth restored with a hybrid composite resin (Tetric). METHODS: Cervical cavities without a bevel at the cavo-surface margins were prepared in the buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted primary and permanent molar teeth. After being restored, the teeth were stored for 1 week in a saline solution at 37 degrees C and then thermally cycled between 5 and 55 degrees C. Marginal leakage was determined subsequently using a radioactive isotope containing 45Ca and an autoradiographic technique. RESULTS: The results revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in microleakage of the bond between permanent and primary teeth dentine and Fuji Bond LC and Probond dentine bonding agents. The difference between permanent and primary teeth groups for gingival values of the Prime and Bond 2.1 group U=22.5, p=0.0355 and the Scotchbond Multipurpose group U=24.0, p=0.0406 were statistically significant. There were no significant differences between the occlusal and gingival microleakage values in either primary or permanent teeth with Prime and Bond 2.1, Fuji Bond LC and Probond except the difference at Scotchbond Multipurpose in primary teeth. For primary teeth gingival margins, none of the bonding systems were significantly different from the control group. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that although no statistically significant differences were found between test and control group values, the use of Fuji II LC in cervical cavities with cementum margins in primary teeth would provide the best resistance to microleakage among the test materials while the use of Scotchbond Multi-Purpose would provide the best resistance to microleakage in cervical cavities with cementum margins in permanent teeth.     

Microleakage of Class V restorations using two different compomer systems: an in vitro study

This study compared the marginal microleakage of Class V cavities restored with Dyract-AP and F2000. Forty Class V cavity preparations were performed on extracted human teeth. As a negative control, twenty teeth were used without Class V preparations. The apical foramina of the teeth were sealed with a layer of varnish and amalgam restorations. Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel, and gingival margins in cementum or dentin that measured approximately three millimeters in width (gingival-occlusal) and length (mesial-distal), were prepared on the buccal surface of the teeth. Samples were divided randomly into 2 groups of 15, and restored per manufacturer's instructions using experimental primer/conditioner (PCC, D/C) and Single Bond Adhesive (3M). All restorations were polished with an abrasive finishing kit. After storage in 37 degrees C water for 24 hours, all specimens were thermocycled between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C for 500 cycles with a 30-second dwell time, followed by immersion in 0.2% basic fucsine for 24 hours. Teeth were then embedded in cold cure acrylic resin, sectioned longitudinally, and the dye penetration at the enamel and cementum margins were scored at 30x magnification. Evaluations were rated from 0 to 3 (0 = no leakage; 1 = dye penetration up to one-half of the preparation depth; 2 = dye penetration more than one-half preparation depth, but less than the axial wall; 3 = dye penetration along the axial wall). Both F-2000 and Dyract-AP indicated no leakage in the enamel margins. Dyract-AP showed no leakage at either the enamel or dentin margins. Fisher's Exact Test revealed that this difference in dentin margins was statistically significant (p < 0.05). Under the given conditions, Dyract-AP and F-2000 demonstrated resistance to microleakage in enamel, and showed Dyract-AP to be more resistant to microleakage in dentin than F-2000.     

Microleakage of Composite Restorations Bonded with Three New Dentin Bonding Agents

ABSTRACT: This report evaluates the impact of two dentin bonding techniques on microleakage of Class V restorations bonded with three new dentin bonding systems. Forty-eight extracted human premolar and molar teeth were randomly assigned to four groups for bonding with EBS Bonding System (ESPE, Seefeld, Germany); Syntac Single-Component (Ivoclar-Vivadent, Schaan, Liechtenstein); Scotchbond 1 (3M Dental Products, St. Paul, Minnesota); and a control, Prime and Bond 2.1 (Dentsply, DeTrey, Konstanz, Germany). Cavities were cut in both the buccal and lingual surfaces. The coronal half of each preparation was in enamel, and the gingival half was in cementum or dentin. The cavities were restored with composite after the application of dentin bonding agents, using two different drying techniques for each material. The teeth were stored in distilled water for 6 days at 37°C and then thermocycled. The restorations were examined microscopically for leakage, using Procion brilliant red as a marker. All groups showed microleakage at both the enamel and dentin margins. At the gingival margin, there was no significant difference between any of the experimental materials and the control for either wet bonding (Kruskal-Wallis: p .8920) or dry bonding (Kruskal-Wallis: p .9973); or between the two techniques for each material (Mann-Whitney U in all cases p > .05). Scanning electron microscopic examination confirmed that the zones of microleakage, as indicated by dye penetration, were principally resin-cohesive failures within the collagen-rich hybrid layer. Three water-based bonding agents were unable to prevent microleakage at either the enamel or dentin margins of Class V cavities regardless of which bonding technique was employed. All systems behaved equally.