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.     

Influence of resin composite shade and location of the gingival margin on the microleakage of posterior restorations

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of resin composite shade and location of the gingival margin (enamel or dentin) on the microleakage of proximal restorations on posterior teeth. Methods and MATERIALS: Sixty freshly extracted human third molars were prepared with standardized Class II box-shaped cavities with proportional size and shape, with distal gingival margins located on the enamel and mesial gingival margins on dentin. The teeth were randomly divided into 6 groups according to resin shade (n=10): G1-Incisal; G2-A1; G3-A2; G4-A3; G5-A3.5; G6-A4. The cavities were restored with a total-etch 1-bottle adhesive system and microhybrid resin composites inserted in 4 increments, light cured for 20 seconds through the occlusal surface, then an additional 60 seconds for each surface. After 1 week of immersion in distilled water, the specimens were thermocycled (500 cycles, 5 degrees -55 degrees C, 30 seconds dwell time), sealed with nail polish and immersed in 0.5% basic fuschin solution for 24 hours. The restorations were sectioned longitudinally, and microleakage was evaluated using a 0-3 score scale. RESULTS: Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon tests at p<0.05. No statistically significant differences between groups were observed regarding the shade of resin composite (p=0.8570). When margins (enamel or dentin) were considered separately, statistically significant differences were observed between groups (p<0.0001), with enamel margins exhibiting lower degrees of microleakage. CONCLUSION: The variation of resin composite shades utilized in this study did not influence the microleakage of Class II restorations. However, the location of the gingival margin influenced the microleakage.     

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.     

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.     

A study of microleakage in Class II composite restorations using four different curing techniques

There are several incremental techniques for the placement of posterior composites in Class II cavities that were introduced to overcome clinical failures associated with these restorations. This study evaluated microleakage in Class II cavities restored with four different curing techniques. On 40 non-carious, freshly extracted human premolars, Class II cavities were prepared following a standard pattern in which the mesial cavities had a cervical margin 1.0 mm above the CEJ, and for distal cavities, 1.0 mm below the CEJ. The specimens were randomly divided into four groups. Each cavity surface was conditioned with 35% phosphoric acid and rinsed to remove the excess water, followed by a dental bonding agent (PQ1) being used for all the cavities. The teeth were then restored with a fiber reinforced resin-based composite (Neulite F), using four different techniques: Group 1, metal matrix with wooden wedge; Group 2, transparent matrix with reflective wedge; Group 3, metal matrix with wooden wedge and light tip and Group 4, metal matrix with wooden wedge and bio-glass cylinder. Then, the restorations were finished and polished, rebonded, thermocycled (2000 times, 5 degrees C to 55 degrees C, 30 second dwell time), stained, sectioned vertically and viewed under a stereomicroscope (40x). They were then scored on a 0-4 scale based on microleakage at the gingival margins. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. The results showed that Group 1 demonstrated the most leakage, while the other three groups showed less leakage than Group 1. There was no significant difference between the enamel and dentin gingival margin groups. As a result of these findings, the authors concluded that restoration with metal matrices, using light conducting instruments, results in significantly less microleakage at the gingival margins of Class II resin composite restorations.     

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.     

Effects of finishing/polishing techniques on microleakage of resin-modified glass ilonomer cement restorations

This study investigated the effect of finishing/polishing techniques on the microleakage of resin-modified glass ionomer restorations. Class V preparations were made on the buccal and lingual/palatal surfaces of freshly extracted teeth. The cavities on each tooth were restored with Fuji II LC (FT [GC]) and Photac-Fil Quick (PF [3M-ESPE]) according to manufacturers' instructions. Immediately after light-polymerization, gross finishing was done with eight-fluted tungsten carbide burs. The teeth were then randomly divided into four groups and finishing/polishing was done with one of the following systems: (a) Robot Carbides (RC); (b) Super-Snap system (SS); (c) OneGloss (OG) and (d) CompoSite Polishers (CS). The sample size for each material-finishing/polishing system combination was eight. After finishing/polishing, the teeth were stored in distilled water at 37 degrees C for one week. The root apices were then sealed with acrylic and two coats of varnish was applied 1 mm beyond the restoration margins. The teeth were subsequently subjected to dye penetration testing (0.5% basic fuchsin), sectioned and scored. Data was analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests at a significance level of 0.05. Results of statistical analysis were as follows: Enamel margins: PF-OG相似文献   

In vitro analysis of the effects of acid or laser etching on microleakage around composite resin restorations

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to determine the effect of two conditioning methods, phosphoric acid and XeCl laser application on microleakage at composite resin restorations. METHODS: Class II MOD (mesio-occluso-distal) cavities were prepared on 90 extracted human wisdom teeth with one proximogingival margin on enamel and the other on dentin. Phosphoric acid (37%) and a XeCl excimer laser system were used for the etching procedure. The prepared teeth were randomly assigned to six groups: In group 1, acid-etching of the enamel margins was followed by application of enamel bonding, in group 2 additionally a dentin bonding system was used. In group 3, acid-etching of the enamel and dentin (total etch) was followed by the application of dentin bonding. In group 4, laser-etching of enamel margins was followed by the application of enamel bonding, in group 5 dentin bonding was used additionally. In group 6, laser-etching of enamel and dentin margins was followed by the application of dentin bonding. All restorations were placed incrementally and polymerized with a halogen light source. After restoration, all samples were thermocycled and stained in 0.5% basic fuchsin and sectioned longitudinally in a mesio-distal plane. Microleakage was scored by means of a stereomicroscope. The margins of the restorations at tooth-resin interface were examined with a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: In all groups, marginal leakage was more extensive at the gingival margin that was in dentin than at the gingival margin in enamel. Microleakage scores and the gap at the tooth-resin interface were significantly lower in all acid-etched groups than in laser-etched groups. CONCLUSION: Acid-etch technique is more effective than the investigated laser-etch technique at 308nm concerning the reduction of marginal leakage in composite restorations.     

Microleakage of Compoglass-F and Dyract-AP compomers in Class V preparations after salivary contamination

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of salivary contamination on the microleakage within Class V preparations of teeth restored with either Compoglass-F/Syntac SC and Dyract-AP/Prime and Bond 2.1. METHODS: Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in cementum were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted human permanent molar teeth. Preparations were distributed randomly into 4 treatment groups (N = 16) consisting of the two compomers and their respective bonding agents with and without salivary contamination. After treatment, the samples were stored in tap water for 24 hours, thermocycled, stained with dye, sectioned, and scored for microleakage. RESULTS: Salivary contamination had no significant effect on enamel microleakage but significantly increased both linear and penetrating microleakage versus non-contaminated for both compomer/dentin bonding systems. CONCLUSION: These data indicate salivary contamination adversely effects gingival but not enamel microleakage when Class V restorations are restored with either Compoglass F/Syntac SC or Dyract-AP/Prime and Bond 2.1.     

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.     

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.     

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 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.     

Effect of multi-step dentin bonding systems and resin-modified glass ionomer cement liner on marginal quality of dentin-bonded resin composite Class II restorations

The use of resin composites in the restoration of Class II cavities with gingival margins located in dentin is still controversial. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the effect of four state-of-the-art multi-step dentin-bonding systems (A. R. T. Bond, Syntac, OptiBond DC, Scotchbond Multipurpose) on marginal adaptation and microleakage of dentin-bonded composite Class II restorations. A total of 72 Class II cavities with gingival margins in dentin were prepared in extracted molars and filled with fine-hybrid composites using a three-sited light curing technique. In one half of the cavities the pulpal wall was lined with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement liner (RM-GIC), in the other half a total bonding technique was applied. A. R. T. Bond and Syntac were tested with selective enamel etching (SE) and total etching (TE). Marginal adaptation was evaluated in a scanning electron microscope before and after thermocycling (TC). Microleakage was determined by dye penetration. After TC the proportions of continuous margin in dentin ranged from 37% (Syntac/SE) to 91.2% (A. R. T. Bond/TE). Scotchbond Multipurpose exhibited the lowest degree of microleakage (0.22 mm). Marginal enamel fracture was the most prevalent marginal defect at the enamel margins (8.3–22.2%). The use of the RM-GIC had no beneficial effect on any of the marginal parameters, either in dentin or in enamel. It is concluded that low degrees of marginal gap formation and microleakage can be achieved in totally bonded composite Class II restorations when using state-of-the-art multi-step bonding systems in combination with a meticulous incremental filling technique. Received: 6 April 1998 / Accepted: 25 August 1998     

Influence of marginal bevels on microleakage around Class V cavities bonded with seven self-etching agents

PURPOSE: To evaluate microleakage around Class V resin-based composite restorations in box-shaped cavities with and without marginal bevels, bonded with one of seven self-etching materials and a non-self etching system. METHODS: 120 extracted human premolars were randomly assigned to eight groups for bonding with the following self-etching agents: Prompt-L Pop, Adper Prompt, Clearfil SE, Prime& Bond NT with NRC, Xeno111, One-Up Bond, AdheSe, or Prime & Bond NT using a total etch technique (36% H2PO4). Box cavities were cut in both the lingual and buocal surfaces. The cavities were made with an ISO 010-fissure diamond bur in a water-cooled high-speed handpiece and were approximately 3 mm wide, 1.5 mm deep, and 2.0 mm high. Selected at random, box-shaped cavities were cut with a 0.5 mm bevel in enamel and dentin on one side and on the contra-lateral side, box-shaped cavities were cut without bevels. Each tooth served as its own control. The teeth were thermocycled and the specimens prepared and examined for microleakage using Procion Red as a marker. RESULTS: All gingival margins leaked whether or not a bevel had been placed, when bonded either with a self-etching agent or using a total etch technique with 36% phosphoric acid. There was no significant difference in leakage between the self-etching groups or those using a total etch technique, at the gingival bevel margins, (P= 0.7384) or the gingival non-beveled margins (P= 0.2307; Kruskal-Wallis Test). Microleakage was found with every agent, both occlusally and gingivally, when bonded either with a self-etching agent or using a total-etch technique. There was no significant difference in leakage between the self-etching groups or those using a total etch technique at the enamel bevel margins, (P= 0.9907) or the enamel non-beveled margins (P= 0.9963; Kruskal-Wallis Test).     

In vivo and in vitro evaluation of Class II composite resin restorations with different matrix systems

PURPOSE: To investigate in vivo and in vitro Class II composite restorations performed with two matrix and wedge systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred nine Class II restorations were performed in 23 patients, 59 with metallic matrices and wooden wedges (group 1) and 50 with polyester matrices and reflective wedges (group 2). All cavities were restored using Single Bond and P-60 (3M ESPE). In the metal matrix group, polymerization was performed from the occlusal, and in the polyester group through the reflective wedge. To assess microleakage, 40 proximal standard slot cavities were prepared in 20 noncarious human third molars. In the mesial cavity, the gingival margin was located at the enamel level, and in the distal cavity at the cementum/dentin. Specimens were randomly divided into two groups (n = 20) and restored with Single Bond, Z-250 (3M ESPE), and the same techniques used in the in vivo study: metal matrix/wooden wedge (group 1) and polyester matrix/reflective wedge (group 2). Specimens were thermocycled (500 times, 5 degrees C to 55 degrees C), then isolated with nail varnish and immersed in fuchsin for 8 h. Specimens were sectioned longitudinally and microleakage was assessed under magnification (40X) using a standard scoring system. RESULTS: Data were subjected to the chi-square test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Kruskal-Wallis H-test. Matrix systems presented similar results in the clinical evaluation and the in vitro microleakage test of Class II composite restorations. Dye leakage was minimal at enamel margins, and statistically lower (p < 0.05) than at cementum/dentin margins. CONCLUSION: The different matrix systems had no influence on clinical performance or in vitro sealing ability of Class II composite restorations.     

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 and SEM interfacial micromorphology of amalgam restorations using three adhesive systems

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the microleakage and interfacial micromorphology of Class V cervical amalgam restorations lined with OptiBond, AElitebond, or Panavia 21. METHODS: Unlined amalgams served as control. Cavities were treated with each dentin bonding system according to the manufacturers' instructions and restored with Tytin non-gamma 2 spherical amalgam. After one week of storage in tap water at 37 degrees C, the specimens were thermocycled (1000 cycles, 6-60 degrees C, 30s dwell time). Microleakage was assessed by means of basic fuchsin dye penetration and recorded according to an ordinal scale. RESULTS: None of the systems tested in this study completely eliminated microleakage. Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA and Mann-Whitney U test found that on the occlusal wall, Panavia 21 and the control group had the least leakage (P<0.05). No statistically significant differences were found at dentin margins (P>0.05). Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test found that Panavia 21 and the control group had less leakage at the occlusal than at the dentin margins (P<0.05); when AElitebond and OptiBond groups were evaluated, microleakage at the enamel and at the dentin margins was similar for each group. With the adhesive systems, perhaps the hydrophilic bonding agents incorporated the dye during specimen immersion and/or sectioning. CONCLUSIONS: The use of adhesives may not be as worthy as resin cements for sealing and bonding amalgam restorations to enamel and dentin.     

Microleakage study of flowable composite resin systems

The purpose of this in vitro microleakage study was to evaluate four low-viscosity composite resin systems. Each resin system included the corresponding bonding agent for each respective flowable composite. A hybrid material was used as a control. A total of 75 noncarious, freshly extracted human teeth were prepared with a Class 5 occlusal preparation and a gingival preparation at the cementoenamel junction. The materials were inserted according to the manufacturers' recommendations using the single-component bonding agent for each system. Teeth were thermocycled 800 times between 5 degrees C and 55 degrees C with 30-second dwell times. The teeth were then coated with nail polish 1 mm short of the restoration, placed in a basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours, and sectioned with a diamond wheel. Enamel and dentin/cementum margins were analyzed for microleakage on a scale of 0 (no leakage) to 3 (axial wall). Results were evaluated with the Fisher's exact test. The results of the study indicate that there was no leakage at the enamel margin of any restorations. No statistically significant differences in microleakage were found in dentin/cementum margins among the samples in the experimental group or between the experimental group and control group. The results indicate flowable composites demonstrate resistance to microleakage in both enamel and cementum/dentin margins similar to TPH hybrid composite.     

Evaluation of microleakage using different bonding agents

This study evaluated microleakage in vitro using different bonding agents. Forty-two freshly extracted caries-free human teeth were randomly divided into seven groups of six teeth and restored with different adhesive systems: Single Bond, Prime&Bond NT, Excite, Durafill Bond, Etch&Prime 3.0, Prompt L-Pop and Vitremer as the control group. All groups were treated according to manufacturers' instructions. Class V cavities were prepared on buccal and lingual surfaces (3 x 2.5 x 1.5 mm) of each tooth (12 restorations per group), with gingival margins in dentin. The teeth were restored with Charisma resin composite. After finishing and polishing with Denco-Flex disks, the teeth were thermocycled for 200 cycles (5 degrees C-55 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C, 60-second dwell time). Apical foramina and surfaces around restorations were coated with nail varnish, stained in 50% AgNO3 solution for 12 hours and longitudinally sectioned. Microleakage was evaluated with a stereomicroscope. Marginal penetration was scored on a 0-4 scale. Statistical analysis using the Kruskal-Wallis test revealed significant (p < or = 0.05) leakage at dentin margins for all adhesive systems when compared to the control. Except for Durafill Bond, no significant difference was found between the self-etching adhesives and one-bottle adhesives.