Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2016; 10(02): 163-169
DOI: 10.4103/1305-7456.178315
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

The effect of surface sealants with different filler content on microleakage of Class V resin composite restorations

Ozge Kam Hepdeniz
1   Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkiye
,
Ugur Burak Temel
1   Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkiye
,
Muhittin Ugurlu
1   Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkiye
,
Ozgur Koskan
2   Department of Biometry and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkiye
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
23 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objective: Microleakage is still one of the most cited reasons for failure of resin composite restorations. Alternative methods to prevent microleakage have been investigated increasingly. The aim of this study is to evaluate the microleakage in Class V resin composite restorations with or without application of surface sealants with different filler content. Materials and Methods: Ninety-six cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces with the coronal margins located in enamel and the cervical margins located in dentin. The cavities restored with an adhesive system (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan) and resin composite (Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan). Teeth were stored in distilled water for 24 h and separated into four groups according to the surface sealants (Control, Fortify, Fortify Plus, and G-Coat Plus). The teeth were thermocycled (500 cycles, 5–55°C), immersed in basic fuchsine, sectioned, and analyzed for dye penetration using stereomicroscope. The data were submitted to statistical analysis by Kruskal–Wallis and Bonferroni–Dunn test. Results: The results of the study indicated that there was minimum leakage at the enamel margins of all groups. Bonferroni–Dunn tests revealed that Fortify and GC-Coat groups showed significantly less leakage than the Control group and the Fortify Plus group at dentin margins in lingual surfaces (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The all surface sealants used in this study eliminated microleakage at enamel margins. Moreover, unfilled or nanofilled surface sealants were the most effective in decreasing the degree of marginal microleakage at dentin margins. However, viscosity and penetrability of the sealants could be considered for sealing ability besides composition.

Key words:

Microleakage - resin composite - surface sealant
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Sadeghi M, Davari A, Lynch CD. The effect of re-bonding using surface sealant or adhesive system on microleakage of class V resin composite restorations. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2013; 10: 596-601
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Arora R, Kapur R, Sibal N, Juneja S. Evaluation of Microleakage in class II cavities using packable composite restorations with and without use of liners. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012; 5: 178-84
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lokhande NA, Padmai AS, Rathore VP, Shingane S, Jayashankar DN, Sharma U. Effectiveness of flowable resin composite in reducing microleakage – An in vitro study. J Int Oral Health 2014; 6: 111-4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kasraie S, Azarsina M, Khamverdi Z, Shokraneh F. Microleakage of dual-cured adhesive systems in class v composite resin restorations. J Dent (Tehran) 2012; 9: 99-106
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Sánchez-Ayala A, Farias-Neto A, Vilanova LS, Gomes JC, Gomes OM. Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems. Braz Oral Res 2013; 27: 225-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Arias VG, Campos IT, Pimenta LA. Microleakage study of three adhesive systems. Braz Dent J 2004; 15: 194-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 D'Alpino PH, Pereira JC, Rueggeberg FA, Svizero NR, Miyake K, Pashley DH. Efficacy of composite surface sealers in sealing cavosurface marginal gaps. J Dent 2006; 34: 252-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Magni E, Zhang L, Hickel R, Bossù M, Polimeni A, Ferrari M. SEM and microleakage evaluation of the marginal integrity of two types of class V restorations with or without the use of a light-curable coating material and of polishing. J Dent 2008; 36: 885-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Atoui JA, Chinelatti MA, Palma-Dibb RG, Corona SA. Microleakage in conservative cavities varying the preparation method and surface treatment. J Appl Oral Sci 2010; 18: 421-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Ghavamnasiri M, Moosavi H, Tahvildarnejad N. Effect of centripetal and incremental methods in Class II composite resin restorations on gingival microleakage. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007; 8: 113-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Sensi LG, Marson FC, Baratieri LN, Monteiro JuniorS. Effect of placement techniques on the marginal adaptation of class V composite restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2005; 6: 17-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Costa PfeiferCS, Braga RR, Cardoso PE. Influence of cavity dimensions, insertion technique and adhesive system on microleakage of class V restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 2006; 137: 197-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Demirci M, Tuncer S, Tekce N, Erdilek D, Uysal O. Influence of adhesive application methods and rebonding agent application on sealing effectiveness of all-in-one self-etching adhesives. J Esthet Restor Dent 2013; 25: 326-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Owens BM, Johnson WW. Effect of new generation surface sealants on the marginal permeability of class V resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 481-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lopes MB, Saquy PC, Moura SK, Wang L, Graciano FM, Correr SobrinhoL. et al. Effect of different surface penetrating sealants on the roughness of a nanofiller composite resin. Braz Dent J 2012; 23: 692-7
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Delfino CS, Duarte Jr S. Effect of the composite surface sealant application moment on marginal sealing of compactable composite resin restoration. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2007; 18: 2257-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Antonson SA, Yazici AR, Okte Z, Villalta P, Antonson DE, Hardigan PC. Effect of resealing on microleakage of resin composite restorations in relationship to margin design and composite type. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 389-95
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Silva SantanaSV, Bombana AC, Flório FM, Basting RT. Effect of surface sealants on marginal microleakage in class V resin composite restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2009; 21: 397-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Aguilar FG, Roberti GarciaLda F, Cruvinel DR, Sousa AB, de Carvalho PanzeriPires-de-Souza F. Color and opacity of composites protected with surface sealants and submitted to artificial accelerated aging. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 24-33
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Valentini F, Oliveira SG, Guimarães GZ, Barbosa RP, Moraes RR. Effect of surface sealant on the color stability of composite resin restorations. Braz Dent J 2011; 22: 365-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 dos Santos PH, Pavan S, Assunção WG, Consani S, Correr-Sobrinho L, Sinhoreti MA. Influence of surface sealants on microleakage of composite resin restorations. J Dent Child (Chic) 2008; 75: 24-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Lima AF, Soares GP, Vasconcellos PH, Ambrosano GM, Marchi GM, Lovadino JR. et al. Effect of surface sealants on microleakage of Class II restorations after thermocycling and long-term water storage. J Adhes Dent 2011; 13: 249-54
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ramos RP, Chinelatti MA, Chimello DT, Dibb RG. Assessing microleakage in resin composite restorations rebonded with a surface sealant and three low-viscosity resin systems. Quintessence Int 2002; 33: 450-6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Celik C, Cehreli SB, Arhun N. Resin composite repair: Quantitative microleakage evaluation of resin-resin and resin-tooth interfaces with different surface treatments. Eur J Dent 2015; 9: 92-9
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Idriss S, Abduljabbar T, Habib C, Omar R. Factors associated with microleakage in class II resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2007; 32: 60-6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ernst CP, Galler P, Willershausen B, Haller B. Marginal integrity of class V restorations: SEM versus dye penetration. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 319-27
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Heintze S, Forjanic M, Cavalleri A. Microleakage of class II restorations with different tracers – Comparison with SEM quantitative analysis. J Adhes Dent 2008; 10: 259-67
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Amaral CM, Peris AR, Ambrosano GM, Pimenta LA. Microleakage and gap formation of resin composite restorations polymerized with different techniques. Am J Dent 2004; 17: 156-60
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Irie M, Tjandrawinata R, Suzuki K. Effect of delayed polishing periods on interfacial gap formation of class V restorations. Oper Dent 2003; 28: 552-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Ramos RP, Chimello DT, Chinelatti MA, Dibb RG, Mondelli J. Effect of three surface sealants on marginal sealing of class V composite resin restorations. Oper Dent 2000; 25: 448-53
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Kumar AA, Hariharavel VP, Narayanan A, Murali S. Effect of protective coating on marginal integrity of nanohybrid composite during bleaching with carbamide peroxide: A microleakage study. Indian J Dent Res 2015; 26: 167-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar