The purpose of this study was to evaluate the abrasion resistance of surface penetrating sealant which was applied on a composite resin restoration and to provide proper time to reapply sealant on composite resin surface.

Two hundred rectangular specimens, sized 8 × 3 × 2 mm, were made of Micronew (Bisco, Inc., Schaumburg, IL, U.S.A) and divided into two groups; F group (n = 10) was finished with coarse and medium grit of Sof-Lex discs and BisCoverwas applied B group (n = 190) after finishing with discs. B group was again subdivided into nineteen subgroups. From B-1 group to B-18 group were subjected to toothbrush abrasion test using a distilled water-dentifrice slurry and toothbrush heads. B-IM group was not subjected to toothbrush abrasion test.

Average surface roughness (Ra) of each group was calculated using a surface roughness tester (Surfcorder MSE-1700: Kosaka Laboratory Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). A representative specimen of each group was examined by FE-SEM (S-4700: Hitachi High Technologies Co., Tokyo, Japan). The data were analysed using cluster analysis, paired t-test, and repeated measure ANOVA. The results of this study were as follows;

Ra of F group was 0.898 ± 0.145 μm and B-IM group was 0.289 ± 0.142 μm. Ra became higher from B-1 group (0.299 ± 0.48 μm) to B-18 group (0.642 ± 0.313 μm).

Within a limitation of this study, finished resin surface will be again smooth and glazy if BisCover would be reapplied within 8 to 14 months after applying to resin surface.

The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of three resin surface sealants to prevent microleakage in Class V composite resin restorations. Forty Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and gingival margin in dentin were prepared on the buccal surfaces of sound extracted molars, and restored with composite resin. Restorations were randomly assigned into one of four equal groups (n = 10): a control group, without resin sealing, and three experimental groups in which margins were sealed with Fortify Plus, Biscover and Permaseal, respectively. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 4 hours, sectioned longitudinally, and observed the leakage at the occlusal and gingival margins. The result was analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney test and Wilcoxon signed rank test.

In conclusion, the ability to reduce microleakage at occlusal margins was similar in all of three sealants. However at gingival margin, it depended on the type of used resin surface sealant. At gingival margin, control and Fortify Plus group showed statistically higher microleakage than PermaSeal group, and Fortify Plus group also showed higher microleakage than BisCover group (p < 0.05).

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect on marginal leakage of a resin surface sealant (Biscover) applied before or after polymerization of composite resin to unsealed composite restorations. Thirty Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and cervical margin in dentin or cementum were prepared on the buccal surfaces of sound extracted molars and restored with a microfilled light-cured composite resin (Micronew). Restorations were randomly assigned into one of three equal groups (n = 10): a control group - no surface sealing, group 1 - applied Biscover after polymerization of the composite resin, and group 2 - applied Biscover before polymerization of the composite resin. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 4 hours, sectioned longitudinally, and analyzed for leakage at the occlusal and gingival margins. The results of this study were as follows;

1. In sealed group, group 2 showed higher microleakage than group 1 at both occlusal and gingival margins, but there was no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05).

2. Unsealed control group showed a little higher microleakage than sealed group at occlusal margins, and a little higher or similar microleakage than sealed group at gingival margins (p > 0.05).

3. Control group and group 2 showed significantly less microleakage at the occlusal margins, but group 1 showed no significantly difference between microleakage at the occlusal and gingival margins.