This study evaluated the marginal microleakage of five single step adhesives. Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of the single step adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z-250 (Group 1), AQ Bond/Metafil CX (Group 2), One-Up Bond F/Palfique Toughwell (Group 3), Futurabond/Admira (Group 4), Xeno III/Spectrum TPH (Group 5).

The restored teeth were thermocycled. Microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye solution. The teeth were bisected buccolingually and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney tests.

The results of this study were as follows;

Microleakage of enamel margins in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 1, 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05).

In conclusion, Prompt L-Pop showed the least leakage at enamel margin, and AQ Bond showed at dentin margin in this study. Marginal miroleakage in dentin was higher than that in enamel.

This study investigated the influence of IRM on marginal microleakage of 5th generation adhesives. Class V cavities with gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 60 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into six groups. Group 1 and 4 received no temporary restoration with IRM. Group 2 and 5 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/1g). Group 3 and 6 were covered with IRM mixed at P/L ratio(10g/2g). The temporary restorations were removed mechanically with an ultrasonic scaler after one-week storage in distilled water. The cavities were restored using one of two adhesives and composites; Single Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 1, 2 and 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4, 5 and 6).

Following one day storage in distilled water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles(between 5℃ and 55℃) and immersed in 2% methylene blue for dye penetration testing. The results were analysed using Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked test at a significance level of 0.05.

The results of this study were as follows:

1. Ranking of mean microleakage scores at the enamel margins was Group 1<Group 3<Group 2<Group 4<Group 5<Group 6. The microleakage of Group 6 was significantly higher than that of Groups 1, 2 and 3(p<0.05).

2. At the enamel margins, without regard to pretreatment with IRM, the microleakage of Single Bond was lower than that of UniFil Bond.

3. Ranking of mean microleakage scores at the dentin margins was Group 4<Group 1<Group 5<Group 6<Group 3<Group 2. But there were no significant difference among microleakages of each group(p>0.05).

4. At the dentin margins, the microleakage of the group not pretreated with IRM was lower than that of the group pretreated with IRM. And the microleakage of UniFil Bond was lower than that of Single Bond.

5. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentin margins of each groups, Group 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 at dentin margin were higher microleakage than those at enamel margin. There were significant difference between enamel and dentin microleakage of Group 2 and 3(p<0.05).

This study evaluated the microleakage performance of four self-etcing primer adhesives(Clearfil SE Bond, Clearfil Liner Bond 2, UniFil Bond, and FL Bond) and one self-etching adhesive(Prompt L-Pop). Class V cavity preparations with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in dentin were prepared on both buccal and lingual surfaces of 50 extracted human molar teeth. Prepared teeth were randomly divided into five groups and restored using one of five adhesives and composite resins: Prompt L-Pop/Filtek Z 250(Group 1), Clearfil SE Bond/Clearfil AP-X(Group 2), Clearfil Liner Bond 2/Clearfil AP-X(Group 3), UniFil Bond/UniFil F(Group 4), and FL Bond/Filtek Z 250(Group 5).

Following one day storage in room temperature water, the restored teeth were thermocycled for 500 cycles between 5℃ and 55℃. Marginal microleakage was assessed by dye penetration using 2% methylene blue dye. After 24 hours, the teeth were sectioned longitudinally and evaluated for microleakage under steromicroscope. The data were statistically analysed by Kruskal-Wallis Test, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests.

The results of this study were as follows;

1. The microleakges at both enamel and dentinal margins were the lowest in group 4, increasing among groups in the following order: group 2, follwed by group 5, follwed by group 1, and the highest in group 3.

2. At the enamel margins, the microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than those of groups 2, 4 and 5(p<0.05), and also the microleakage of group 1 was statistically higher than those of groups 2 and 5(p<0.05).

3. At the dentinal margins, microleakage of group 3 was significantly higher than microleakages of groups 1, 2, 4 and 5(p<0.05).

4. Compared with microleakages between the enamel and dentinal margins of each group, groups 1, 4 and 5 at enamel margin and group 2 and group 3 at dentinal margin were higher microleakage. But there was no significant difference between enamel and dentinal microleakages of each group(p>0.05).