Mohammad Reza Soltani, Nasim Dadfar, Kiana Ghannadan
Mohammad Reza Soltani1, Nasim Dadfar2, Kiana Ghannadan3
1Assistant Professor of Operative Dentistry, School of Dental, Ilam University of Medical of Sciences, Ilam, Iran.
2General Dentist, Faculty of Dentistry, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam, Iran.
3Assistant Professor of Operative Dentistry, School of Dental, Qazvin University of Medical of Sciences, Qazvin, Iran.
Volume - 14,
Issue - 6,
Year - 2021
Introduction: Dental composites have been extended as the selected material in most of recent restorations. However, the contraction caused by their polymerization remains the main issue. The stress made by this contraction could cause the divide of composite-tooth junction to be severed. Bacteria, liquids, molecules or ions could cross the gap made between the repair and the cavity wall which this process is called micro-leakage. Micro-leakage causes leakage, tenderness, secondary decay, damage to the pulp, marginal discoloration, which finally results in restoration failure. It can be said that the success of resin restoration material depends perfectly on the ability of the enamel and dentin bonds. This research aims to determine the best bonding to decline micro-leakage. Materials and Methods: In this research, 48 human premolar teeth were prepared without decay, restoration, fracture and wear. Each class V standard cavity was prepared on buccal and lingual surfaces. The shaved teeth were randomly divided into 4 groups including 12 ones. They were polished after restoration. All samples of the 4 groups were subjected to the heat cycling. Apex was sealed with adhesive wax and all parts of the tooth were covered with two layers of nail polish. The samples were incubated in 0.5% Fuchsin solution for 24 hours at room temperature. After that, they were washed under the faucet and the nail polish was removed from tooth surface. Teeth were divided into two mesio distal sections by a cutting machine. Samples were observed by stereo microscope. samples were evaluated based on the micro-leakage grading. Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney and Will Coxson tests were used to evaluate the results. Results: In each group, 48 cavities were examined. The results of this research showed that in none of enamel surface of bindings, micro-leakage was observed. In the dentine area, the least amount of micro-leakage was related to the Clearfil SE Bond. There was no statistically significant difference between the micro-leakage of Clearfil SE Bond and G Premio Bond by Self Etch method (P value> 0.05). Also, there was no significant difference between micro-leakage of G_Premio Bond by Self Etch and G_Premio Bond by Etch and Rinse method. The micro-leakage of Adper Single Bond 2 was significantly higher in the dentin rather than the other groups. Conclusions: In dentine level, the highest micro-leakage was related to Adper Single Bond 2 bonding and the least one was in Clearfil SE Bond and G Premio Bond by Self Etch method.
Cite this article:
Mohammad Reza Soltani, Nasim Dadfar, Kiana Ghannadan. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Step Etch and Rinse, Two Step Self Etch and Universal Dentin Bonding. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021; 14(6):3209-4. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2021.00559
Mohammad Reza Soltani, Nasim Dadfar, Kiana Ghannadan. Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Two Step Etch and Rinse, Two Step Self Etch and Universal Dentin Bonding. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021; 14(6):3209-4. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2021.00559 Available on: https://rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2021-14-6-49
1. Luong E, Shayegan A. Assessment of microleakage of class V restored by resin composite and resin-modified glass ionomer and pit and fissure resin-based sealants following Er: YAG laser conditioning and acid etching: in vitro study. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dentistry. 2018; 10(1): 83-92.
2. Jacker-Guhr S, Ibarra G, Oppermann LS, Lührs AK, Rahman A, Geurtsen W. Evaluation of microleakage in class V composite restorations using dye penetration and micro-CT. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2016; 20(7): 1709-18.
3. Sabarathinam Jm Muralidharan N.P. Evaluations of Micro-Leakage in Composite Resin Restoration, Glass Ionomer Cement Restoration and Traditional Amalgam Restoration using Streptococcus mutans. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019; 12(11): 5341-44.
4. Gayathri, M. Light Microscopic Changes in Pulp due to Dental Caries at Different Stages. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2015; 8(7): 935-36.
5. Mousavinasab SM, Ghasemi M, Yadollahi M. Evaluation of Enamel and Dentinal Microleakage in Class II Silorane-Based and Methacrylate-Based Resin Composite Restorations Using Specific and Nonspecific Adhesives. Journal of Dentistry (Tehran, Iran). 2018; 15(4): 240-49.
6. Al-Boni R, Raja OM. Microleakage evaluation of silorane based composite versus methacrylate based composite. Journal of Conservative Dentistry: JCD. 2010; 13(3): 152-55.
7. Sooraparaju SG, Kanumuru PK, Nujella SK, Konda KR, Reddy K, Penigalapati S. A comparative evaluation of microleakage in class v composite restorations. International Journal of Dentistry. 2014; 8(1); 1-4.
8. Alomari QD, Barrieshi-Nusair K, Ali M. Effect of C-factor and LED curing mode on microleakage of class V resin composite restorations. European Journal of Dentistry. 2011; 5(4): 400-08.
9. Atoui JA, Chinelatti MA, Palma-Dibb RG, Corona SA. Microleakage in conservative cavities varying the preparation method and surface treatment. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2010; 18(4): 421-25.
10. Lührs AK, Guhr S, Schilke R, Borchers L, Geurtsen W, Günay H. Shear bond strength of self-etch adhesives to enamel with additional phosphoric acid etching. Operative Dentistry. 2008; 33(2): 155-62.
11. Jain M.R, Gheena S. Dentin Comparison in Primary and Permanent Molars under Compound Light Microscopy: A Study. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2015; 8(10): 1369-73.
12. Khoroush M, Keshani F, Esmaeili M, Shirazi MH. Marginal Integrity of Cervical Restorations with Caries-Affected Dentinal Walls: Effect of Contamination with Hemostatic Agents. Journal of Dentistry (Tehran, Iran). 2018; 15(4): 214-21.
13. Guru EP. A Review on Bio-Dentin. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016; 9(9):1524-28.
14. Esmaeilikia M, Gholami-Parizad E, Ghazanfari Z, Abedzadeh M.S, Roozegar M.A. Investigation of Oral Health Status (DMFT-index) among 3–6 Years Old Children in Ilam (Western Iran), 2015. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2020; 13(4): 1878-82.
15. Sriram K, Vishnupriya V, Gayathri R. Review on the role of Nanotechnology in Dentistry and Medicine. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016; 9(8): 1249-52.
16. Raj B. Remineralising agents in dentistry. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2016; 9(10): 1734-36.
17. Burgess JO, Sadid-Zadeh R, Cakir D, Ramp LC. Clinical evaluation of self-etch and total-etch adhesive systems in noncarious cervical lesions: A two-year report. Operative Dentistry. 2013; 38(5): 477-87.
18. Baracco B, Fuentes MV, Ceballos L. Five-year clinical performance of a silorane-vs a methacrylate-based composite combined with two different adhesive approaches. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2016; 20(5): 991-1001.
19. Amaral RC, Stanislawczuk R, Zander-Grande C, Gagler D, Reis A, Loguercio AD. Bond strength and quality of the hybrid layer of one-step self-etch adhesives applied with agitation on dentin. Operative Dentistry. 2010; 35(2): 211-19.
20. Sai K, Shimamura Y, Takamizawa T, Tsujimoto A, Imai A, Endo H, Barkmeier WW, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Influence of degradation conditions on dentin bonding durability of three universal adhesives. Journal of Dentistry. 2016; 54(1): 56-61.
21. Wagner A, Wendler M, Petschelt A, Belli R, Lohbauer U. Bonding performance of universal adhesives in different etching modes. Journal of Dentistry. 2014; 42(7): 800-07.
22. Muñoz MA, Luque-Martinez I, Malaquias P, Hass V, Reis A, Campanha NH, Loguercio AD. In vitro longevity of bonding properties of universal adhesives to dentin. Operative Dentistry. 2015; 40(3): 282-92.
23. McLean DE, Meyers EJ, Guillory VL, Vandewalle KS. Enamel bond strength of new universal adhesive bonding agents. Operative Dentistry. 2015; 40(4): 410-17.
24. Roozegar MA, Havasian MR, Panahi J, Hashemian A. The prevalence of the localized aggressive periodontitis among students at 14-16 years in Ilam, Iran. Der Pharmacia Lettre. 2014; 6(6): 62-4.
25. Roozegar M.A, Abdi Z, Matin S, Khorshidi A, Azizian M. The effect of 1.2 mg simvastatin mouthwash on the level of interleukin-6 in patients with chronic periodontitis. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology. 2019; 13(3): 463-67.
26. Abdi Z, Roozegar M.A, Beigi S, Khorshidi A, Azizian M, Beigi Z. Using Simvastatin Mouthwash (0.6%, 1.2% and 1.8%) on the Improvement of Clinical Parameters in Patients with Chronic Periodontitis. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2020; 13(2): 862-66.
27. Fruits TJ, Knapp JA, Khajotia SS. Microleakage in the proximal walls of direct and indirect posterior resin slot restorations. Operative Dentistry. 2006; 31(6): 719-27.
28. Sartori N, Junior SM, Meyer Filho A, Arcari GM. Effect of dental bleaching on the microleakage of class V composite restorations. Revista Odonto Ciência. 2009; 24(3): 279-82.
29. Al-Saleh M, El-Mowafy O, Tam L, Fenton A. Microleakage of posterior composite restorations lined with self-adhesive resin cements. Operative Dentistry. 2010; 35(5): 556-63.
30. Ernst CP, Galler P, Willershausen B, Haller B. Marginal integrity of class V restorations: SEM versus dye penetration. Dental Materials. 2008; 24(3): 319-27.
31. Majeed MA. Microleakage Evaluation of a Silorane-Based and Methacrylate-Based Packable and Nanofill Posterior Composites (in vitro comparative study). Tikrit Journal for Dental Sciences. 2012; 1(2): 19-26.
32. Hooshmand T, Tabari N, Keshvad A. Marginal leakage and microhardness evaluation of low-shrinkage resin-based restorative materials. Gen Dent. 2013; 61(1): 46-50.
33. Poureslami HR, Sajadi F, Sharifi M, Ebrahimi SF. Marginal microleakage of low-shrinkage composite silorane in primary teeth: an in vitro study. Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects. 2012; 6(3): 94-7.
34. Pasricha SK. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of tooth coloured restorative materials after exposure to 33% hydrogen peroxide-An in-vitro study. International Journal of Contemporary Dentistry. 2011; 2(5): 9-15.
35. Sánchez-Ayala A, Farias-Neto A, Vilanova LS, Gomes JC, Gomes OM. Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems. Brazilian Oral Research. 2013; 27(3): 225-30.
36. Tuncer D, Çelik Ç, Çehreli SB, Arhun N. Comparison of microleakage of a multi-mode adhesive system with contemporary adhesives in class II resin restorations. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology. 2014; 28(13): 1288-97.
37. Sai K, Shimamura Y, Takamizawa T, Tsujimoto A, Imai A, Endo H, Barkmeier WW, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Influence of degradation conditions on dentin bonding durability of three universal adhesives. Journal of Dentistry. 2016; 54(1): 56-61.
38. Karaman E, Güler E. Marginal Adaptation of Class V Restorations with a New Universal Adhesive. International Journal of Periodontics & Restorative Dentistry. 2016; 36(1): 125-30.
39. Tian F, Zhou L, Zhang Z, Niu L, Zhang L, Chen C, et al. Paucity of Nanolayering in Resin-Dentin Interfaces of MDP-based Adhesives. J Dent Res. 2016; 95(4): 380-87.
40. Motevaselian F, Yassine E, Mirzaee M, Kharazifard MJ, Heydari S, Shafiee M. In Vitro Microleakage of Class V Composite Restorations in Use of Three Adhesive Systems. Journal of Islamic Dental Association of Iran. 2016; 28(1): 14-9.
41. Da Rosa WL, Piva E, da Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dentistry. 2015; 43(7): 765-76.