Advances in reducing microleakage in dental composites

Abstract

The clinical success of esthetic restorations, including composite resins, depends on the quality and durability of the interface between the tooth and restoration. Current commercially available materials do not possess ideal sealing at the marginal interfaces, and marginal microleakage leads to clinically significant issues for patients and clinicians. Many factors may affect microleakage formation, including the adaptation of composite resins to the tooth surface, the adhesive system used, and the polymerization shrinkage of the materials. The evolution of restorative materials, designed to achieve low shrinkage and improve mechanical properties, could lead to restorations with improved clinical performance. Furthermore, searching for clinical techniques to optimize the integrity of resin/dentin bonds is significant, and the evaluation of microleakage is also critical to the assessment of restorative materials. The objective of this paper was to review the literature on the recent advances in restorative materials, the potential applications of clinical techniques, and the methods of measuring microleakage.

Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Different Class V Cavity Preparation Restored with Composite in Primary Molars: An In Vitro Study

“…7 Increased tendency of microleakage in large cavity preparations is attributed to reduced strength and greater flexibility of remaining tooth structure teeth and to the greater volume of composite which causes greater shrinkage stresses. 8 By decreasing the bulk amount of resin used, volumetric shrinkage will be less which reduces the stress generated as well as microleakage. 9 It was concluded by Borges et al; 2014, that the positive relationship between the surface area and the stress concentration was firmly confirmed.…”

In vitro microleakage at the enamel and dentin margins of class II cavities of primary molars restored with a bulk‐fill and a conventional composite

“…Microleakage refers to passage of bacteria, liquids, molecules, and ions through the cavity wall‐restoration interface, which is not clinically detectable (Vicente et al, 2009 ). Microleakage is an important factor that adversely affects the durability of restorations, and can cause tooth hypersensitivity, recurrent caries, and pulpal damage (Gong et al, 2019 ). To seal restoration margins, a uniform interface between the cavity walls and restoration is imperative (Gogna et al, 2011 ).…”

Pitfalls and their prohibition in composite restoration – A review

“…However, the performance of the composite restoration depends upon the polymerization of resin component within it as it causes polymerization shrinkage upon setting. 1 The polymerization shrinkage of composite resins develops due to the transition of monomer molecules to a polymer structure caused by the replacement of van der Waals forces with covalent bonds, leading to a less free volume. 1,2 At present, the market is swamped with a variety of composites such as bulk fill, nanofill, microfilled etc.…”

“…1 The polymerization shrinkage of composite resins develops due to the transition of monomer molecules to a polymer structure caused by the replacement of van der Waals forces with covalent bonds, leading to a less free volume. 1,2 At present, the market is swamped with a variety of composites such as bulk fill, nanofill, microfilled etc. but composite resins continue to suffer from polymerization shrinkage, which can cause stress at the interface of the material and tooth structure.…”