SUMMARY
INTRODUCTIONMicroleakage in dentistry has been studied for more than 50 years (Buchanan, 1951;Massler & Ostrovsky, 1954). Through the use of varied techniques and different test media, such as dyes and radioactive materials, microleakage is one of the most widely studied phenomena (Cochran & others, 2004). Kidd (1976) defined microleakage as the passage of bacteria, fluids, molecules or ions along the interface of a dental restoration and wall of the cavity preparation. Hilton (2002a,b) reports that biofilm between the tooth and restoration has been associated with staining at the margins, secondary caries and a general failure mechanism of the restoration. The two papers by Hilton (2002a,b) examine the background, current status and methodology for accomplishing reduced microleakage. Part I (Hilton 2002a) specifically discusses dental amalgam and its microleakage patterns.Studies by Phillips (1961, 1962) indicated that restorative materials exhibited microleakage and showed that the amalgam had an unusual ability to seal itself over time. A few years later, the sixth edition of Skinner and Phillips' Essentials of Dental Materials (1967) Creep may be a major factor in amalgam sealing from microleakage. Creep expansion causes amalgam to fill in the tooth/amalgam interface gap and causes the restoration to extrude out of the preparation.