Comparative evaluation of marginal microleakage of three different resins in Class V composite restorations

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2017.03.001

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To compare and evaluate microleakage at the occlusal wall and cervical wall in Class V cavities restored with Ivoclar Tetric N Ceram Bulk Fill composite, Tetric N Flow composite and N Ceram nanocomposite. METHODS: Sixty-six extracted human maxillary premolars, which were intact and healthy, were randomly assigned into 3 groups (n=22). Standardized Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface of maxillary premolars. The occlusal walls of the cavities were located on the enamel and the cervical walls were located on dentin and cementum. After etching and application of the same bonding agents, the cavities were restored with different composite materials. Group A: Tetric N Ceram nano-hybrid composite , Group B: Tetric N Flow nano-hybrid composite, Group C: Tetric N Ceram Bulk Fill nano-hybrid composite. After curing with soft-start mode, finishing and polishing, the specimens were subjected to thermocycling. The specimens were coated with nail varnish, and immersed in 2% methylene blue solution for 7 days. The teeth were then sectioned longitudinally. Two of the samples chosen randomly from each group were evaluated under scanning electron microscope. Dye penetration of the remaining samples was examined with a stereomicroscope (×40) and scored separately for occlusal and gingival aspect on a 0-3 ordinal scale. The leakage depth was measured with Spot Advanced version 4.6 software package. The data were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon test using SPSS 17.0 software package. RESULTS: Tetric Bulk Fill had significantly less microleakage at the cervical margins than other groups (P<0.05). There was no significant difference at the occlusal margin (P>0.05) between the three groups. There was significant difference between the enamel and cervical wall microleakage (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: With the limitations of this study, Tetric Bulk Fill provided the least microleakage at the cervical wall among the three groups. There was no significant difference at the occlusal margin.

Key words: Class V cavities, Microleakage, Polymerization shrinkage, Bulk fill composite

CLC Number:

R783.1

ZHU Zheng, ZHU Ya-qin. Comparative evaluation of marginal microleakage of three different resins in Class V composite restorations[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2017, 26(3): 241-245.

References

[1] Sooraparaju SG, Kanumuru PK, Nujella SK, et al. A comparative evaluation of microleakage in class Ⅴ composite restorations [J]. Int J Dent, 2014: 685643.
[2] Sharma RD, Sharma J, Rani A. Comparative evaluation of marginal adaptation between nanocomposites and microhybrid composites exposed to two light cure units [J]. Indian J Dent Res, 2011, 22(3): 495.
[3] Alonso RC, Cunha LG, De Goes MF, et al. Association of photoactivation methods and low modulus liners on marginal adaptation of composite restorations [J]. Acta Odontol Scand, 2004, 62(6) : 298-304.
[4] Sadeghi M. An in vitro microleakage study of class V cavities restored with a new self-adhesive flowable composite resin versus different flowable materials [J]. Dent Res J (Isfahan), 2012, 9(4): 460-465.
[5] Bucuta S, Ilie N. Light transmittance and micro-mechanical properties of bulk fill vs conventional resin based composites [J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2014, 18(8): 1991-2000.
[6] Yikilgan I, Akgul S, Özcan S, et al. An in vitro evaluation of the effects of desensitizing agents on microleakage of Class Ⅴ cavities [J]. J Clin Exp Dent, 2016, 8(1): e55-59.
[7] Ozel E, Tuna EB, Firatli S, et al. Effect of different parameters of Er:YAG laser irradiations on Class Ⅴ composite restorations: A scanning electron microscopy study[J]. Scanning, 2016, 38(5): 434-441.
[8] Alonso RC, Sinhoreti MA, Correr Sobrinho L, et al. Effect of resin liners on the microleakage of class V dental composite restorations [J]. J Appl Oral Sci, 2004, 12(1): 56-61.
[9] Ferracane JL. Developing a more complete understanding of stresses produced in dental composites during polymerization [J]. Dent Mater, 2005, 21(1): 36-42.
[10] Moon PC, Tabassian MS, Culbreath TE. Flow characteristics and film thickness of flowable resin composites [J]. Oper Dent, 2002, 27(3): 248-253.
[11] Estafan D, Estafan A, Leinfelder KF. Cavity wall adaptation of resin-based composites lined with flowable composites [J]. Am J Dent, 2000, 13(4): 192-194.
[12] Czasch P, Ilie N. In vitro comparison of mechanical properties and degree of cure of bulk fill composites [J]. Clin Oral Investig, 2013, 17(1): 227-235.
[13] Leprince JG, Palin WM, Hadis MA, et al. Progress in dimethacrylate based dental composite technology and curing efficiency [J]. Dent Mater, 2013, 29(2): 139-156.
[14] Floyd CJ, Dickens SH. Network structure of Bis-GMA- and UDMA-based resin systems [J]. Dent Mater, 2006, 22(12): 1143-1149.
[15] Jang JH, Park SH, Hwang IN. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of bulk-fill resin composites and highly filled flowable resin [J]. Oper Dent, 2015, 40(2): 172-180.
[16] Burke FJ, Crisp RJ, James A, et al. Two year clinical evaluation of a low-shrink resin composite material in UK general dental practices [J]. Dent Mater, 2011, 27(7): 622-630.
[17] Furness A, Tadros MY, Looney SW, et al. Effect of bulk/incremental fill on internal gap formation of bulk-fill composites [J]. J Dent, 2014, 42(4): 439-449.
[18] Ilie N, Bucuta S, Draenert M. Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance [J]. Oper Dent, 2013, 38(6): 618-625.
[19] Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, et al. Three-year clinical evaluation of a flowable and a hybrid resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions [J]. J Dent, 2010, 38(3): 191-200.
[20] Lokhande NA, Padmai AS, Rathore VP, et al. Effectiveness of flowable resin composite in reducing microleakage-an in vitro study [J]. J Int Oral Health, 2014, 6(3): 111-114.
[21] Chuang SF, Jin YT, Liu JK, et al. Influence of flowable composite lining thickness on Class II composite restorations [J]. Oper Dent, 2004, 29(3): 301-308.
[22] Kimyai S, Ajami AA, Chaharom ME, et al. Comparison of microleakage of three adhesive systems in classⅤcomposite restorations prepared with Er, Cr:YSGG laser [J]. Photomed Laser Surg, 2010, 28(4): 505-510.
[23] 董世涛 , 张晗 , 刘国华. 流动性纳米复合树脂充填V类洞微渗漏研究 [J] .临床和实验医学杂志, 2014,13(2): 87-90.
[24] Conte NR Jr, Goodchild JH. Flowable Composites Resins: do they decrease microleakage and shrinkage stress? [J]. Compend Contin Educ Dent, 2013, 34 (4):1-6.
[25] Zorzin J, Maier E, Harre S, et al. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization properties and extended light curing[J]. Dent Mater, 2015, 31(3): 293-301.