Evaluation of marginal microleakage in Class II cavities: Effect of microhybrid, flowable, and compactable resins

Objective: The goal of the present study was to evaluate the microleakage on the cementum/dentin and enamel surfaces in Class II restorations, using different kinds of resin composite (microhybrid, flowable, and compactable). Method and materials: Forty human caries-free molars were extracted and selected. Eighty Class II standardized cavities were made in the cervical wall at the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) and at the mesial and distal surfaces. The teeth were divided into four groups: G1 - adhesive system + microhybrid resin composite Z100; G2 - adhesive system + compactable resin composite Prodigy Condensable; G3 - adhesive system + flowable resin composite Revolution + Z100 resin composite; G4 - adhesive system + Revolution fluid resin + compactable resin composite Prodigy Condensable. The adhesive system used in this study was Scotchbond Multi-Purpose Plus. The specimens were thermocycled in baths of 5°C and 55°C for 1,000 cycles and immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution. The specimens then were sectioned and evaluated on degree of dye penetration. Results: The results were evaluated using the nonparametric Kruskall-Wallis test, which showed a statistically significant difference between groups G1 and G4, G2 and G4, and G3 and G4. Conclusions: None of the materials was able to eliminate the marginal microleakage at the cervical wall; the application of a low-viscosity resin composite combined with a compactable resin composite significantly decreased the microleakage.

Low shrinkage composite resins: influence on sealing ability in unfavorable C-factor cavities

The present investigation observed the sealing ability of low shrinkage composite resins in large and deep cavities, placed and photocured in one increment. Large, deep cavities (5.0 mm diameter and 2.5 mm deep) surrounded by enamel were prepared in bovine teeth, which were then divided into five groups. Groups 1, 2, 3 and 4: acid conditioning + Adper Single Bond (3M/ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) and restoration with Aelite LS Posterior (BISCO Inc. Schaumburg, IL, USA) (G1); Filtek Z-350 (3M/ESPE,St Paul, MN, USA) (G2); Filtek Z-350 Flow (3M/ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) (G3); Premisa (KERR Corporation, Orange, CA, USA) (G4). Group 5: Silorane Adhesive system (3M/ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA) + restoration with Filtek Low Shrinkage Posterior P90 (3M/ESPE, St Paul, MN, USA). After polymerization, the teeth were immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsine solution and immediately washed. Using the Imagetool Software, the extent of dye along the margins was calculated as a percentage of total perimeter. The restorations were then transversally sectioned and the depth of dye penetration was calculated in mm, using the same software. Kruskal-Wallis analysis for all groups showed no statistical differences for extent (p = 0.54) or depth (p = 0.8364) of dye penetration. According to this methodology, the so-called low shrinkage composite resins had the same sealing ability compared to regular and flowable nanocomposite materials.