Anjali Gupta1, Pradeep Tavane2, Pankaj Kumar Gupta3, Bellam Tejolatha1, Ashik Ali Lakhani4, Ram Tiwari5, Shruti Kashyap4, Gaurav Garg4. 1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rungta College of Dental Science and Research, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh, India. 2. Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Teerthankar Mahaveer Dental College, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 3. Reader, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rungta College of Dental Science and Research, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh, India. 4. Postgraduate Student, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rungta College of Dental Science and Research, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh, India. 5. Senior Lecturer, Department of Public Health, Rungta College of Dental Science and Research, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh, India.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Adhesive dentistry is overwhelmingly evolving with respect to the dental surgeon's and patient's perspective. Embracing the concept of minimally invasive dentistry which follows minimum intervention performed to produce good adhesion and tooth coloured restoration, in turn makes the newer generation bonding agents more acceptable and appropriate withstanding the demand for stable restoration. AIM: To study and compare the extent of microleakage between tooth and restoration interface in class V composite resin restorations applying one Total Etch (AdperTM single bond), two Self Etch (AdperTM SE Plus, AdperTM Easy One) and Universal bonding agents using dye penetration method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 freshly orthodontically extracted human maxillary and mandibular premolars were included in the study. Class V cavities were prepared with a cylindrical diamond bur on the facial surface of each tooth, having approximate dimensions of 3 mm × 2.5 mm × 1.5 mm. Teeth were divided into four groups (30 in each group). Group A AdperTM single bond 2 (3M ESPE), Group B AdperTM SE Plus (3M ESPE), Group C AdperTM Easy One (3M ESPE), Group D AdperTM Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE) bonding agents were applied as per the manufacturer's instructions and the cavities were then restored with nanohybrid composite resin (Tetric N Ceram Ivoclar Vivadent). Teeth were then thermocycled for 200 cycles at 5°-55°C with 60 seconds of dwell time. Specimens were subjected to a dye leakage test. Microleakage was evaluated using a stereomicroscope. Data was analysed using Kruskal- Wallis, Dunn and Mann-Whitney test to assess the difference in microleakage among various adhesives. RESULTS: The present study revealed that the microleakage was more at the gingival margin when compared with occlusal and this was found to be statistically significant. At the occlusal margin statistical significant difference was found only between AdperTM Easy one and AdperTM SE Plus, on the other hand at gingival margin no statistical significant difference was found. CONCLUSION: One step self etch agents showed less microleakage than total etches and universal adhesive at occlusal margin. Higher degree of microleakage was observed at gingival margin compared to occlusal margin.
INTRODUCTION: Adhesive dentistry is overwhelmingly evolving with respect to the dental surgeon's and patient's perspective. Embracing the concept of minimally invasive dentistry which follows minimum intervention performed to produce good adhesion and tooth coloured restoration, in turn makes the newer generation bonding agents more acceptable and appropriate withstanding the demand for stable restoration. AIM: To study and compare the extent of microleakage between tooth and restoration interface in class V composite resin restorations applying one Total Etch (AdperTM single bond), two Self Etch (AdperTM SE Plus, AdperTM Easy One) and Universal bonding agents using dye penetration method. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 120 freshly orthodontically extracted human maxillary and mandibular premolars were included in the study. Class V cavities were prepared with a cylindrical diamond bur on the facial surface of each tooth, having approximate dimensions of 3 mm × 2.5 mm × 1.5 mm. Teeth were divided into four groups (30 in each group). Group A AdperTM single bond 2 (3M ESPE), Group B AdperTM SE Plus (3M ESPE), Group C AdperTM Easy One (3M ESPE), Group D AdperTM Single Bond Universal (3M ESPE) bonding agents were applied as per the manufacturer's instructions and the cavities were then restored with nanohybrid composite resin (Tetric N Ceram Ivoclar Vivadent). Teeth were then thermocycled for 200 cycles at 5°-55°C with 60 seconds of dwell time. Specimens were subjected to a dye leakage test. Microleakage was evaluated using a stereomicroscope. Data was analysed using Kruskal- Wallis, Dunn and Mann-Whitney test to assess the difference in microleakage among various adhesives. RESULTS: The present study revealed that the microleakage was more at the gingival margin when compared with occlusal and this was found to be statistically significant. At the occlusal margin statistical significant difference was found only between AdperTM Easy one and AdperTM SE Plus, on the other hand at gingival margin no statistical significant difference was found. CONCLUSION: One step self etch agents showed less microleakage than total etches and universal adhesive at occlusal margin. Higher degree of microleakage was observed at gingival margin compared to occlusal margin.
Authors: André V Ritter; Edward J Swift; Harald O Heymann; John R Sturdevant; Aldridge D Wilder Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.634