International Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 3 ( May-June, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Evaluation of Nanoleakage Depth and Pattern of Cervical Restorations Bonded with Different Adhesive Systems

Niveditha Bhupanapadu, Mohammed A Sattar, Arpita Deb

Keywords : Dentinbonding, Hybrid layer, Nanoleakage

Citation Information : Bhupanapadu N, Sattar MA, Deb A. Evaluation of Nanoleakage Depth and Pattern of Cervical Restorations Bonded with Different Adhesive Systems. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2022; 15 (3):299-303.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2391

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-06-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aim: To evaluate nanoleakage depth and pattern of cervical restorations bonded with different adhesive systems. Materials and methods: Thirty-six extracted human premolar teeth were used for the study and grouped according to different bonding agents. Group I: fifth generation dentin bonding agent—ONE COAT SL. Group II: sixth generation dentin bonding agent—PARABOND. Group III: seventh generation dentin bonding agent—ONE COAT 7.0. For nanoleakage depth evaluation, 36 teeth were divided into three groups of 12 teeth each, according to adhesive systems used. For each adhesive system, teeth were subdivided into three subgroups of four teeth each, according to storage period, 24 hours, 1 month, and 3 months before the examination. In each tooth, two cavities were prepared (buccal and lingual), each cavity was lined with different adhesive systems and restored using a nanohybrid composite. The restored teeth were then immersed in water bath at temperature 37oC for intended period of time and then stored in 50% silver nitrate for 24 hours and photo developing solution for 8 hours. After this, the teeth were cut in buccolingual direction and subjected to scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis for nanoleakage depth analysis. Results: Group II showed the highest nanoleakage at all three periods. At 24 hours, group III showed more leakage than group I (mean = 0.2869 > 0.2506). At 1 month storage period, there was no significant difference in the leakage. At 3 months storage period, group III showed less leakage than group I (mean = 0.5544 < 0.7313).

PDF Share
  1. Anusavice KJ, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips’ Science of Dental Materials. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013. pp. 185–381.
  2. Sano H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, et al. Nanoleakage: leakage within the hybrid layer. Oper Dent 1995;20(1):18–25.
  3. Erick J, Gwinnett A, Pashley D, et al. Current concepts on adhesion to dentin. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1997;8(3):306–335. DOI: 10.1177/10454411970080030501
  4. Carvalho RM, Tay F, Sano H, et al. Long term mechanical properties of EDTA-demineralized dentin matrix. J Adhes Dent 2000;2(3): 193–199.
  5. Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Kaga M, et al. In-vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds in humans over 1 to 3 years. J Dent Res 2000;79(6): 1385–1391. DOI: 10.1177/00220345000790060601
  6. Van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, et al. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater 2011;27(1):17–28. DOI: 10.1016/
  7. Tay FR, Pashley DH. Aggressiveness of contemporary self-etching systems. I: depth of penetration beyond dentin smear layers. Dent Mater 2001;17(4):296–308. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(00)00087-7
  8. Carvalho RM, Chersoni S, Frankenberger R, et al. A challenge to the conventional wisdom that simultaneous etching and resin infiltration always occurs in self-etch adhesives. Biomaterials 2005;26(9): 1035–1042. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.04.003
  9. Lucena-Martin C, Gonzalez-Rodriguez MP, Ferrer-Luque CM, et al. Influence of time and thermocycling on marginal sealing of several dentin adhesive systems. Oper Dent 2001;26(6):550–555.
  10. Hiraishi N, Nishiyama N, Ikemura K, et al. Water concentration in self-etching primers affects their aggressiveness and bonding efficacy to dentin. J Dent Res 2005;84(7):653–658. DOI: 10.1177/154405910508400714
  11. Jacobsen T, Söderholm KJ. Some effects of water on dentin bonding. Dent Mater 1995;11(2):132–136. DOI: 10.1016/0109-5641(95)80048-4
  12. Pashley EL, Zhang Y, Lockwood PE, et al. Effects of HEMA on water evaporation from water-HEMA mixtures. Dent Mater 1998;14(1):6–10. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(98)00003-7
  13. Yiu CKY, Pashley EL, Hiraishi N, et al. Solvent and water retention in dental adhesive blends after evaporation. Biomaterials 2005;26(34):6863–6872. DOI: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.05.011
  14. Vinay S, Shivanna V. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of fifth, sixth, and seventh generation dentin bonding agents: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13(3):136–140. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.71645
  15. Sánchez-Ayala A, Farias-Neto A, Vilanova LSR, et al. Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems. Braz Oral Res 2013;27(3):225–230. DOI: 10.1590/S1806-83242013000300003
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.