Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics

Ailin Ehteshami

1 Article

Marginal microleakage of cervical composite resin restorations bonded using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives: two dimensional vs. three dimensional methods: Maryam Khoroushi, Ailin Ehteshami; Restor Dent Endod 2016;41(2):83-90. Published online April 18, 2016; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2016.41.2.83

Objectives

This study was evaluated the marginal microleakage of two different adhesive systems before and after aging with two different dye penetration techniques.

Materials and Methods

Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 48 human molars. Clearfil SE Bond and Single Bond (self-etching and etch-and-rinse systems, respectively) were applied, each to half of the prepared cavities, which were restored with composite resin. Half of the specimens in each group underwent 10,000 cycles of thermocycling. Microleakage was evaluated using two dimensional (2D) and three dimensional (3D) dye penetration techniques separately for each half of each specimen. Data were analyzed with SPSS 11.5 (SPSS Inc.), using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (α = 0.05).

Results

The difference between the 2D and 3D microleakage evaluation techniques was significant at the occlusal margins of Single bond groups (p = 0.002). The differences between 2D and 3D microleakage evaluation techniques were significant at both the occlusal and cervical margins of Clearfil SE Bond groups (p = 0.017 and p = 0.002, respectively). The difference between the 2D and 3D techniques was significant at the occlusal margins of non-aged groups (p = 0.003). The difference between these two techniques was significant at the occlusal margins of the aged groups (p = 0.001). The Mann-Whitney test showed significant differences between the two techniques only at the occlusal margins in all specimens.

Conclusions

Under the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that the 3D technique has the capacity to detect occlusal microleakage more precisely than the 2D technique.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Effect of different types of adhesive systems on the bond strength and marginal integrity of composite restorations in cavities prepared with the erbium laser—a systematic review
Deepti Dua, Ankur Dua, Eugenia Anagnostaki, Riccardo Poli, Steven Parker
Lasers in Medical Science.2022; 37(1): 19. CrossRef
Comparing the Ability of Various Resin-Based Composites and Techniques to Seal Margins in Class-II Cavities
Abdullah Saleh Aljamhan, Sultan Ali Alhazzaa, Abdulrahman Hamoud Albakr, Syed Rashid Habib, Muhammad Sohail Zafar
Polymers.2021; 13(17): 2921. CrossRef
Comparison of the Ability of Two Brands of CBCT with That of SEM to Detect the Marginal Leakage of Class V Composite Resin Restorations
Mitra Karbasi Kheir, Leili Khayam, Mehrbakhsh Nilashi
The Scientific World Journal.2021; 2021: 1. CrossRef
Analysis of microleakage and marginal gap presented by new polymeric systems in class V restorations: An in vitro study
Jefferson Ricardo Pereira, Hugo Alberto Vidotti, Lindomar Corrêa Júnior, Alef Vermudt, Mauro de Souza Almeida, Saulo Pamato
The Saudi Dental Journal.2021; 33(3): 156. CrossRef
Hydrolysis-resistant and stress-buffering bifunctional polyurethane adhesive for durable dental composite restoration
Jiahui Zhang, Xiaowei Guo, Xiaomeng Zhang, Huimin Wang, Jiufu Zhu, Zuosen Shi, Song Zhu, Zhanchen Cui
Royal Society Open Science.2020; 7(7): 200457. CrossRef
A comparison of the marginal and internal fit of porcelain laminate veneers fabricated by pressing and CAD-CAM milling and cemented with 2 different resin cements
Ziad N. Al-Dwairi, Rana M. Alkhatatbeh, Nadim Z. Baba, Charles J. Goodacre
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.2019; 121(3): 470. CrossRef
Microleakage in class V cavities prepared using conventional method versus Er:YAG laser restored with glass ionomer cement or resin composite
Sertac Peker, Figen Eren Giray, Basak Durmus, Nural Bekiroglu, Betül Kargül, Mutlu Özcan
Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology.2017; 31(5): 509. CrossRef

175 View
0 Download
7 Crossref

Author index