Leakage Pathway of Class V Cavities Restored With Different Flowable Resin Composite Restorations

Abstract

This study investigated the leakage pathway of facial and lingual Class V cavities restored with different flowable resin composites bonded with one bonding agent by examining the resin/dentin interface. Forty Class V cavities were etched with 37% phosphoric acid gel; Single Bond dental adhesive was applied, then the cavities were randomly divided into four groups (n=10). Three groups were restored with one of three flowable resin composites (Grandio Flow, Filtek Flow and Admira Flow). The fourth group was restored with Z250 (hybrid resin composite) to serve as a control. The specimens were then placed in 50% w/v silver nitrate solution for 24 hours and immersed in a photodeveloping solution for eight hours. Thereafter, the specimens were sectioned bucco-lingually, polished, mounted on stubs, gold sputter coated and examined by scanning electron microscope.Silver particle penetration length with and without gap formation was measured directly on the scanning electron microscope monitor and calculated as a percentage of the total length of the cut dentin surface that was penetrated by silver nitrate. The data were analyzed with one-way ANOVA and Tukey HSD test. The groups restored with Filtek Flow and Admira Flow showed a microleakage pattern where silver nitrate penetration was observed with gap formation at the tooth/restoration interface and Filtek Flow recorded significantly higher leakage than Admira Flow. Grandio Flow showed similar marginal adaptation to Z250 resin composite with no gap formation at the interface. However, silver ions had penetrated beneath the resin-impregnated layer in cavities restored with Grandio Flow and Z250, indicating nanoleakage occurred. This study suggests that volumetric shrinkage in resin composites remains a problem. Although some new technologies are trying to solve the © Operative Dentistry, 2008, 33-1, 31-36

Depth of Cure of New Flowable Composite Resins

“…However, recently, manufacturers have introduced flowable composite resins of high filler content (Awliya, 2008;Ikeda, 2009) Generally speaking, the results compiled in this study are comparable to the overall results found in the above mentioned studies by the different manufacturers. In this study, there was a statistically significant difference between the materials studied.…”

“…The concept of placing a flowable composite underneath a posterior composite restoration was proposed to allow for better marginal adaptation and thereby reduce microleakage and to counter the polymerization shrinkage stress of the overlying composite resin because of its higher elastic properties (Braga, 2003;Awliya, 2008). However, laboratory studies evaluating the efficacy of a flowable composite as a liner have been equivocal (Gomeç, 2005).…”

Effects of a dental adhesive incorporating antibacterial monomer on the growth, adherence and membrane integrity of Streptococcus mutans

“…1 Gap formation can be observed between the adhesive resin and the primed dentin, or between the adhesive resin and the hybrid layer, according to the investigations on the resin/dentin interface of several commercial bonding systems. 2,3 Therefore, attempts of functionalizing adhesive system with antibacterial activity have been made to ensure the biological sealing of the restoration even when microleakage occurs. [4][5][6][7][8][9] A number of reports have described the addition of antibacterial components, such as antibiotics, inorganic agents and fluorides, in the constituents of dental adhesive system.…”

Non-destructive assessment of cavity wall adaptation of class V composite restoration using swept-source optical coherence tomography

“…This stress has been shown to lead to gap formation at the restoration-tooth interface 3,4) . Such a marginal gap and subsequent microleakage may lead to marginal staining 5,6) , postoperative sensitivity 7) , and secondary caries 8) . In addition, gaps along the cavity wall may lead to pain with biting 9) and failure of adhesion by repeated occlusal loading 10) .…”