Marginal microleakage in Bulk Fill resins

Abstract

Introduction Despite advances and innovations in restorative dentistry, microleakage remains one of the main problems in this area. Objective To evaluate in vitro marginal microleakage of Bulk Fill resins in class II cavities, with cervical termination in the dentin. Material and method Cavities, standardized on the mesial and distal surfaces, were prepared in forty top molars and randomly assigned to four groups (n = 10), according to the resin used. G1 (control): Filtek Z350 (3M/ESPE); G2: Filtek Bulk Fill flow (3M/ESPE); G3: Surefill SDR (Dentsply); G4: X-tra (Voco). These were further subdivided into subgroups according to the strategy used to apply the adhesive (self-etch technique and conventional). After storage for 24 hours in an oven (37 °C), the samples were submitted to the thermocycling test (500 cycles: 5 °C/55 °C). They were later waterproofed, immersed in Basic Fuchsin (0.5%) and sectioned in the mesial-distal direction for evaluation using a stereo magnifying glass at 40X (Coleman) Scores from 0 to 3 were assigned according to the microinfiltration observed. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests, with a significance level of 5%, were used for statistical analysis. Result There was no statistically significant difference between the Bulk Fill resins when the total acid-etching technique was used. Only the Filtek Bulk fill flow resin presented statistically significant results when the application of the adhesive system strategy was considered, with worse results, in relation to other groups, when it the self-etching strategy was considered. Conclusion The degree of leakage of the bulk fill resins studied, in class II cavities, was not influenced by the method of application of the adhesive system (conventional or two-step self-etching bonding agent), except for the Filtek Bulk fill flow.

Evaluation of pre-treatment with chlorexidine in the marginal microinfiltration of three different materials: In vitro study

“…Similar results were found by Guanabara and Araújo (2015), who did not find significant differences with pre-treatment with CHX at a 2-year followup evaluation [13]. Nascimento, et al (2016) [20] showed that the flow composite resins used had a higher marginal sealing capacity in class II restorations after thermocycling, and without the use of CHX as a cleaning agent, proving in their study that, among composites, bulk fill resins did not present significant differences regarding the appearance of marginal microleakage [20], confirming the results found in the present study.…”

The Effect of Gravity on Marginal Integrity of Different Flowable Bulk-Fill Resin Composites

“…While some of these studies have found no significant differences among various bulk-fills, others have identified variations. In parallel to this study, some research comparing XTB with other bulk-fill composites has found XTB to exhibit lower marginal integrity [ 27 , 28 , 29 ]. The reduced integrity of XTB may be attributed to its chemical composition.…”

Marginal filling and adhesive resistance of bulk fill resin applying 18% edta gel compared with 37% phosphoric acid gel in vitro dental conditioning

“…In 2016 Nascimento et al, 25 evaluated microfiltration in Bulk Fill resin using acid etching and self-etching techniques, employing a scale ranging from 0 to 3, with none of the systems eliminating microfiltration. The present study utilized etching acid and 18% EDTA for periods of 60 and 90 seconds, obtaining results which differ slightly from the aforementioned research since statistically significant differences were found between the 60 and 90 seconds 18% EDTA groups.…”