Marginal microleakage of single step adhesives

Young-Gon Cho; Jin-Ho Jeong; Young-Jae Ki; Hee-Young Choi; Cheul-Hee Jin; Sang-Hoon Yoo; Jong-Uk Kim; Byung-Cheul Park

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.2.162

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 29(2); 2004 > Article

Original Article Marginal microleakage of single step adhesives: Young-Gon Cho, Jin-Ho Jeong, Young-Jae Ki, Hee-Young Choi, Cheul-Hee Jin, Sang-Hoon Yoo, Jong-Uk Kim, Byung-Cheul Park; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2004;29(2):162-169.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.2.162
Published online: March 31, 2004

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, Korea.

Corresponding author: Young-Gon Cho. Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, 375 Susuk-dong, Dong-gu, Gwangju 501-759, Korea. Tel: 82-62-220-3840, Fax: 82-62-232-9064, ygcho@mail.chosun.ac.kr

16 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

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;
1. Microleakage of enamel margins in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 1, 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05).
2. Microleakage of dentin margins in group 1 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 5, and that in group 3 was statistically higher than that in groups 2, 4, 5 (p < 0.05).
3. Dentin marginal microleakage was higher than enamel marginal microleakage in all experimental groups.
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.
Keywords: Marginal microleakage; Single step adhesives; Class V cavity preparation; Dye penetration; Enamel margins; Dentin margins

REFERENCES

1. Amaral CM, Hara AT, Pimenta LAF, Rodrigues AL. Microleakage of hydrophilic adhesive systems in class V composite restorations. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 31-33.PubMed
2. Gladys S, Meerbeek BV, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Microleakage of adhesive restorative materials. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 170-176.PubMed
3. Aguiar FHB, Santos AJS, Groppo FC, Lovadino JR. Quantititive evaluation of marginal leakage of two resin composite restorations using two filling techniques. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 475-479.PubMed
4. Gagliardi RM, Avelar RP. Evaluation of microleakage using different bonding agents. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 582-586.PubMed
5. Hannig M, Fu B. Effect of air abrasion and resin composite on microleakage of class V restorations bonded with self-etching primers. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3: 265-272.PubMed
6. Frankenberger R, Perdigao J, Rosa BT, Lopes M. 'No-bottle' vs multi-bottle' dentin adhesive-a microtensile bond strength and morphological study. Dent Mater. 2001;17: 373-380.PubMed
7. Inoue S, Meerbeek BV, Vargas M, Yoshida Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Adhesion mechanism of self-etching adhesives. 1999;Advanced Adhesive Dentistry 3rd International Kuraray symposium. 131-148.
8. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Vargas P, Vijay P, Van Landuyt K, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: Current status and future challenges. Oper Dent. 2003;28: 215-235.PubMed
9. Swift EJ Jr, Perdigao J, Heymann HO. Bonding to enamel and dentin: a brief history and state of the art, 1995. Quintessence Int. 1995;26: 95-110.PubMed
10. Balooch M, Wu-Magidi IC, Balazs A, Lundkvist AS, Marshall SJ, Marshall GW, Siekhaus WJ, Kinney JH. Viscoelastic properties of demineralized human dentin measured in water with an atomic force microscope (AFM) based indentation. J Biomed Mater Res. 1998;40: 539-544.PubMed
11. Walshaw PR, McComb D. Clinical considerations for optimal dentin bonding. Quintessence Int. 1996;27: 619-625.PubMed
12. Pashley DH, Carvalho RM. Dentine permeability and dentine adhesion. J Dent. 1997;25: 355-372.PubMed
13. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching systems. I: Depth of penetration beyond dentin smear layers. Dent Mater. 2001;17: 296-308.PubMed
14. Gordan VV, Vargas MA, Cobb DS, Denehy GE. Evaluation of adhesive systems using acidic primers. Am J Dent. 1997;10: 219-223.PubMed
15. Miyazaki M, Iwasaki K, Onose H, Moore BK. Enamel and dentin bond strengths of single application bonding systems. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 361-366.PubMed
16. Van Meerbeek B, Perdigao J, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. The clinical performance of adhesives. J Dent. 1998;26: 1-20.PubMed
17. Frankenberger R, Kramer N, Petchelt A. Fatigue behaviour of different dentin adhesives. Clin Oral Investig. 1999;3: 11-17.Article PubMed PDF
18. Opdam NJM, Roesters JJM, Feilzer AJ, Verdonschot EH. Marginal integrity and postoperative sensitivity in class 2 resin composite restorations in vivo. J Dent. 1998;26: 555-562.PubMed
19. da Silva Telles PD, Aparecida M, Machado M, Nör JE. SEM study of a self-etching primer adhesive system used for dentin bonding in primary and permanent teeth. Pediatr Dent. 2001;23: 315-320.PubMed
20. Nakabayashi N, Saimi Y. Bonding to intact dentin. J Dent Res. 1996;75: 1706-1715.PubMed
21. Itthagarun A, Tay FR. Self-contamination of deep dentin by dentinal fluid. Am J Dent. 2000;13: 195-200.PubMed
22. Brackett WW, Covey DA, Germain HA. One-year clinical performance of a self-etching adhesive in class V resin composites cured by two methods. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 218-222.PubMed
23. Croll TP. Self-etching adhesive system for resin bonding. ASDC J Dent Child. 2000;176-181.
24. Perdigão J, Frankenberger R, Rosa RT. New trends in dentin/enamal adhesion. Am J Dent. 2000;13: 25D-30D.PubMed
25. Sonoda H, Sasafuchi Y, Kitasako Y, Arakawa M, Otsuki M, Tagami J. Pulpal response to a fluoride-releasing all-in-one resin bonding system. Oper Dent. 2002;27: 271-277.PubMed
26. Ohno H, Kimura M, Fuchigami S, Oguri M. Dental composition. United states patent number 5,739,177. 1998 04 14.
27. Kleter GA, Damen JJM, Everts V, Niehof J, Ten Cate JM. The influence of the organic matrix on demineralization of bovine root dentin in vitro. J Dent Res. 1994;73: 1523-1529.PubMed
28. Nunes MF, Perdigao J, Rosa BT. The effect of an experimental one-application self-conditioning adhesives on microleakage. J Dent Res. 1999;78: 306. (abstract no. 1602).
29. Rosa BT, Perdigao J. Bond strengths of nonrinsing adhesives. Quintessence Int. 2000;31: 353-358.PubMed
30. Li H, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The effect of load cycling on the nanoleakage of dentin bonding systems. Dent Mater. 2002;18(2):111-119.Article PubMed
31. Applequist EA, Meiers JC. Effect of bulk insertion, prepolymerized resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int. 1996;27: 253-258.PubMed
32. Davidson CL, De Gee AJ, Feilzer A. The compositon between the composite-dentin bond strength and the polymerization contraction stress. J Dent Res. 1984;63: 1396-1399.PubMed
33. Mehl A, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH. Physical properties and gap formation of light-cured composites with and without: softstart polymerization. J Dent. 1997;25: 321-330.PubMed
34. Yazici AR, Baseren M, Dayangac B. The effect of flowable resin composite on microleakage in class V cavities. Oper Dent. 2003;28: 42-46.PubMed
35. Ferrari M, Garcia-Godoy F. Sealing ability of new generation adhesive-restorative materials placed on vital teeth. Am J Dent. 2002;15: 117-128.PubMed
36. Hofmann N, Siebrecht C, Hugo B, Klaiber B. Influence of curing methods and materials on the marginal seal of class V composite restorations in vitro. Oper Dent. 2003;28(2):160-167.PubMed
37. Pontes DG, Melo AT, Monnerat AF. Microleakage of new all-in-one adhesive systems on dentinal and enamel margins. Quintessence Int. 2002;33: 136-139.PubMed
38. Barnes DM, McDonald NJ, Thompson VP, Blank LW, Shires PJ. Microleakage in facial and lingual class 5 composite restorations: A comparison. Oper Dent. 1994;19: 133-137.PubMed
39. Pradelle-Plasse N, Nechad S, Tavernier B, Colon P. Effect of dentin adhesives on the enamel-dentin/composite interfacial microleakage. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 344-348.PubMed
40. Tay FR, King NM, Suh BI, Pashley DH. Effect of delayed activation of light-cured resin composite on bonding of all-in-one adhesives. J Adhes Dent. 2001;3: 207-225.PubMed
41. Hasegawa T, Manabe A, Itoh K, Wakumoto S. Investigation of self-etching dentin primers. Dent Mater. 1989;5: 408-410.PubMed
42. Swift EJ Jr, Bayne SC. Shear bond strength of a new one-bottle dentin adhesive. Am J Dent. 1997;10: 184-188.PubMed
43. Kubo S, Yokota H, Sata Y, Hayashi Y. Microleakage of self-etching primers after thermal and flexural load cycling. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 163-169.PubMed
44. Tulunoglu O, Uçtaşh M, Alaçam A, Omürlü H. Microleakage of light-cured resin and resin-modified glass-ionomer dentin bonding agents applied with cocure vs pre-cure technique. Oper Dent. 2000;25: 292-298.PubMed
45. Santini A, Plasschaert AJM, Mitchell S. Effect of composite resin placement techniques on the microleakage of two self-etching dentin-bonding agents. Am J Dent. 2001;14: 132-136.PubMed

Figure 1

Numbers of leakage scores of each group at enamel margins

Figure 2

Numbers of leakage scores of each group at dentin margins

Table 1

Group classification, single step adhesives and composite resins used in this study

Table 2

Distribution of microleakage scores and means at enamel margins

Table 3

Distribution of microleakage scores and means at dentin margins

Table 4

Statistical analysis of microleakage at enamel margin between each group by Mann-Whitney tests

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III

^*: significant differences (p < 0.05)

Table 5

Statistical analysis of microleakage at dentin margin between each group by Mann-Whitney test

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III

^*: significant differences (p < 0.05)

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Marginal microleakage of single step adhesives

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2004;29(2):162-169. Published online March 31, 2004

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.2.162

XML Download

Figure

Marginal microleakage of single step adhesives

Figure 1 Numbers of leakage scores of each group at enamel margins

Figure 2 Numbers of leakage scores of each group at dentin margins

Figure 1

Figure 2

Marginal microleakage of single step adhesives

Table 1

Group classification, single step adhesives and composite resins used in this study

Table 2

Distribution of microleakage scores and means at enamel margins

Table 3

Distribution of microleakage scores and means at dentin margins

Table 4

Statistical analysis of microleakage at enamel margin between each group by Mann-Whitney tests

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III

^*: significant differences (p < 0.05)

Table 5

Statistical analysis of microleakage at dentin margin between each group by Mann-Whitney test

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III

^*: significant differences (p < 0.05)

Table 1 Group classification, single step adhesives and composite resins used in this study

Table 2 Distribution of microleakage scores and means at enamel margins

Table 3 Distribution of microleakage scores and means at dentin margins

Table 4 Statistical analysis of microleakage at enamel margin between each group by Mann-Whitney tests

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III

^*: significant differences (p < 0.05)

Table 5 Statistical analysis of microleakage at dentin margin between each group by Mann-Whitney test

Group 1: Prompt L-Pop, Group 2: AQ Bond, Group 3: One-Up Bond F, Group 4: Futurabond, Group 5: Xeno III