Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Cavities using Packable Composite Restorations with and without use of Liners
Rajesh Arora, Ravi Kapur, Nikhil Sibal, Sumit Juneja
Microleakage, Packable composites
Citation Information :
Arora R, Kapur R, Sibal N, Juneja S. Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Cavities using Packable Composite Restorations with and without use of Liners. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012; 5 (3):178-184.
The advent of the esthetic era and advances in adhesive technology saw the emergence of resin composite materials. But the problem of polymerization shrinkage remained. This was due to the contraction of the resin during curing inducing internal and interfacial stresses at the tooth restoration interface, leading to gap formation and subsequent micro-leakage. A number of techniques and modifications in the material have been proposed to minimize polymerization shrinkage and microleakage. In this study, the hypothesis that the placement of resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) or flowable composite, as liner, beneath the packable composite, on the gingival surface of the tooth [coronal or apical to cementoenamel junction (CEJ)], could reduce the microleakage in class II composite restorations, was tested. Sixty recently extracted noncarious human mandibular molars were used. The teeth were randomly divided into three groups (20 specimens each): Group I (Filtek P60 with RMGIC liner), group II (Filtek P60 with Filtek Z350 liner) and Group III (Filtek P60 without liner). The teeth of each group were further subdivided into two subgroups (equal number of cavities). Subgroup A gingival seat 1 mm occlusal to CEJ on mesial side. Subgroup B gingival seat 1 mm apical to CEJ on distal side. It was concluded that in class II composite restorations gingival microleakage is more at the dentinal surface than on enamel. The use of a flowable composite and RMGIC, as liners, beneath the packable composite, in class II composite restorations, significantly reduces the microleakage when margins are in dentin, but the reverse is true, when the margins are in enamel.
How to cite this article: Arora R, Kapur R, Sibal N, Juneja S. Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Cavities using Packable Composite Restorations with and without use of Liners. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012;5(3):178-184.
Attar N (Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. nurayattar@ hotmail.com), Turgut MD, Gungor HC. The effect of flowable resin composites as gingival increments on the microleakage of posterior resin composites. Oper Dent 2004 Mar-Apr;29(2):162-167.
Anusavice, KJ. Phillips’ science of dental material. 11th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2003. p. 399-441.
Kidd EA. Microleakage in relation to amalgam and composite restorations: A laboratory study. Br Dent J 1976 Nov16;141(10): 305-310.
Beznos C. Microleakage at the cervical margin of composite class II cavities with different restorative techniques. Oper Dent 2001 Jan-Feb;26(1):60-69.
Yazici AR (Hacettepe Uiversity, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Sihhiye, Ankara, Turkey. email@example.com), Celik C, Ozgünaltay G. Microleakage of different resin composite types. Quintessence Int 2004 Nov- Dec;35(10):790-794.
Goracci G, Mori G, Martinis LC. Curing light intensity and marginal leakage of resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int 1996;27:355-362.
Malmström HS (Eastman Dental Center, University of Rochester, New York, USA. Hans_malmstrom@urmc. rochester.edu), Schlueter M, Roach T, Moss ME. Effect of thickness of flowable resins on marginal leakage in class II composite restorations. Oper Dent 2002 Jul-Aug;27(4):373-380.
Demarco FF (Federal University of Pelotas, School of Dentistry, Rua Gonçalves Chaves, 457, Pelotas-RS, Brazil, 96015-560), Ramos OL, Mota CS, Formolo E, Justino LM. Influence of different restorative techniques on microleakage in Class II cavities with gingival wall in cementum. Oper Dent 2001 May- Jun;26(3):253-259.
Schuckar M (Department of Conservative Dentistry & Periodontology, Medical University Hannover, Germany), Geurtsen W. Proximal cervical adaptation of class II composite restorations after thermocycling: a quantitative and qualitative study. J Oral Rehabil 1997 Oct;24(10):766-775.
Civelek A, Ersoy M, L'Hotelier E, Soyman M, Say EC. Polymerization shrinkage and microleakage in Class II cavities of various resin composites. Oper Dent 2003 Sep-Oct;28(5): 635-641.
Aboushala A (Department of Restorative Dentistry, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA), Kugel G, Hurley E. Class II composite resin restorations using glass-ionomer liners: Microleakage studies. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996 Fall;21(1):67-70.
Nakabayashi, N.; Pashley, DH. Hybridization of dental hard tissue. Chicago: Quintessence; 1998. p. 25-54.
Neme AM (University of Detroit Mercy School of Dentistry, MI, USA. firstname.lastname@example.org), Maxson BB, Pink FE, Aksu MN. Microleakage of class II packable resin composites lined with flowables: An in vitro study. Oper Dent 2002 Nov- Dec;27(6):600-605.
Opdam NJ (Department of Cariology and Endodontology, University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands), Roeters JJ, Burgersdijk RC. Microleakage of Class II box-type composite restorations. Am J Dent 1998 Aug;11(4):160-164.
Dietschi D (Department of Preventive Dentistry, University of Geneva, Switzerland), De Siebenthal G, Neveu-Rosenstand L, Holz J. Influence of the restorative technique and new adhesives on the dentin marginal seal and adaptation of resin composite class II restorations: An in vitro evaluation. Quintessence Int 1995 Oct;26(10):717-727.
Pashley DH (Department of Oral Biology/Physiology, School of Dentistry, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta). Clinical consideration of microleakage. J Endod 1990 Feb;16(2):70-77.
Going RE. Microleakage around dental restorations: A summarizing review. J Am Dent Assoc 1972 Jun;84(6):1349- 1357.