OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of an unfilled-adhesive resin (Adper Single Bond) and a filled-adhesive resin (Adper Single Bond 2) with and without a low viscosity resin (Filtek Flow) as an elastic cavity wall on marginal leakage and dentin microtensile bond strength in Class V composite restorations under unloaded and loaded conditions. METHODS: V-shaped cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 56 premolars lined with unfilled (Groups 1 and 3) or filled (Groups 2 and 4) adhesives with (Groups 3 and 4) and without (Groups 1 and 2) a low viscosity resin and restored with a resin composite. The restored teeth in each group were divided into two sub-groups for unloaded and loaded conditions with 50N loading force for 250,000 cycles parallel to the long-axis of the tooth. Five specimens from each group were cut bucco-lingually 0.7 mm thick and subjected to a dye leakage test for four hours using 2% methylene blue dye. The tested specimens were then trimmed into dumbbell shapes at the gingival margin and subjected to microtensile testing. The remaining two specimens were cut, embedded and observed for resin/dentin interfaces under a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: For the microleakage test, there were no significant differences in microleakage among the groups on both the enamel and dentin margin. No statistically significant differences were found between microleakage of the loaded and unloaded groups on enamel margins for all materials. There were statistically significant differences between microleakage of the loaded and unloaded groups on the dentin margin for Groups 3 and 4. For the microtensile test, the significant difference was found between Groups 1 and 4 for the unloaded groups. For the loaded groups, there were no significant differences between Groups 1 and 2 and Groups 3 and 4. There were no statistically significant differences in microtensile bond strength between the loaded and unloaded groups except for Group 2. CONCLUSION: The application of filled adhesive or low viscosity resin had no influence on marginal leakage at both the enamel and dentin margin but it had an influence on the microtensile bond strength to dentin of Class V restorations. Occlusal loading significantly increased the degree of marginal leakage at the dentin margin when low viscosity was applied in combination with either unfilled or filled-adhesives, but it decreased dentin bond strength in the group treated with only filled adhesive.
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of an unfilled-adhesive resin (Adper Single Bond) and a filled-adhesive resin (Adper Single Bond 2) with and without a low viscosity resin (Filtek Flow) as an elastic cavity wall on marginal leakage and dentin microtensile bond strength in Class V composite restorations under unloaded and loaded conditions. METHODS: V-shaped cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 56 premolars lined with unfilled (Groups 1 and 3) or filled (Groups 2 and 4) adhesives with (Groups 3 and 4) and without (Groups 1 and 2) a low viscosity resin and restored with a resin composite. The restored teeth in each group were divided into two sub-groups for unloaded and loaded conditions with 50N loading force for 250,000 cycles parallel to the long-axis of the tooth. Five specimens from each group were cut bucco-lingually 0.7 mm thick and subjected to a dye leakage test for four hours using 2% methylene blue dye. The tested specimens were then trimmed into dumbbell shapes at the gingival margin and subjected to microtensile testing. The remaining two specimens were cut, embedded and observed for resin/dentin interfaces under a scanning electron microscope. RESULTS: For the microleakage test, there were no significant differences in microleakage among the groups on both the enamel and dentin margin. No statistically significant differences were found between microleakage of the loaded and unloaded groups on enamel margins for all materials. There were statistically significant differences between microleakage of the loaded and unloaded groups on the dentin margin for Groups 3 and 4. For the microtensile test, the significant difference was found between Groups 1 and 4 for the unloaded groups. For the loaded groups, there were no significant differences between Groups 1 and 2 and Groups 3 and 4. There were no statistically significant differences in microtensile bond strength between the loaded and unloaded groups except for Group 2. CONCLUSION: The application of filled adhesive or low viscosity resin had no influence on marginal leakage at both the enamel and dentin margin but it had an influence on the microtensile bond strength to dentin of Class V restorations. Occlusal loading significantly increased the degree of marginal leakage at the dentin margin when low viscosity was applied in combination with either unfilled or filled-adhesives, but it decreased dentin bond strength in the group treated with only filled adhesive.
Authors: D Khvostenko; S Salehi; S E Naleway; T J Hilton; J L Ferracane; J C Mitchell; J J Kruzic Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2015-04-18 Impact factor: 5.304
Authors: Ronald E Goldstein; Suruchi Lamba; Nathaniel C Lawson; Preston Beck; Robert A Oster; John O Burgess Journal: J Esthet Restor Dent Date: 2016-09-09 Impact factor: 2.843