EVALUATION OF MICROLEAKAGE IN CERVICALLY PLACED CLASS II RESTORATION WITH AN ALKASITE RESTORATIVE MATERIAL AND BULK FILL COMPOSITE RESIN USING CONFOCAL LASER SCANNING MICROSCOPE - AN IN-VITRO STUDY
Original Research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56501/intjesthresdent.2022.104Keywords:
Alkasite restorative material, Bulk Fill Composite, Confocal LASER scanning microscope, Class II restorationAbstract
Aim: This invitro study aimed to evaluate the microleakage at occlusal and crevical margins 1mm above and below CEJ of class II cavities restored with an alkasite restorative material and bulk fill composite resin.
Materials and Method : Forty intact extracted molars were split into two groups of 20 each. Standardized class II box cavities were prepared mesially and distally with dimensions 4mm buccolingually and 2mm mesiodistally. Group 1- Class II cavities with gingival seat 1mm above CEJ. Group 2- Class II cavities with gingival seat 1mm below CEJ. All the prepared cavity surfaces were etched, rinsed, Tetric N bond applied and light cured. The samples were further subdivided based on restorative material. Subgroup A: Mesial box cavities restored with Cention N. Subgroup B: Distal box cavities restored with Tetric N Ceram Bulkfill. The specimens were thermocycled, submerged in 0.5% aqueous Rhodamine dye for 24 hours, mesiodistally sectioned, and the depth of dye penetration was assessed using Confocal Laser Microscopy (CLSM).
Result: The data was analysed using Mann Whitney test and Wilcoxon signed Rank test. Both Tetric N Ceram Bulk fill and Cention N showed microleakage along occlusal and cervical margins at both levels (1mm above and below CEJ) and this difference was not significant statistically. Mean microleakage at occlusal margin was lower thancervical margin in both groups restored with Cention N and Tetric N Ceram bulk fill and this difference was statistically significant. Gingivally mean microleakage was higher with the margin 1mm below CEJ with both materials compared to the margin 1mm above CEJ. And this difference was statistically significant.
Conclusion: Tetric N Ceram and Cention N performed comparable in terms of microleakage and may be preferred for class II restoration of posterior teeth considering the decreased working time and their favorable properties.
References
Agarwal RS, Hiremath H, Agarwal J, Garg A. Evaluation of cervical marginal and internal adaptation using newer bulk fill composites: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2015;18(1):56-61.
Samanta S, Das UK, Mitra A. Comparison of microleakage in Class V cavity restored with flowable composite resin, glass ionomer cement and Cention N. ImpJ Interdiscip Res. 2017;3(8):180-183.
Barkmeier WW, Cooley RL. Current status of adhesive resin systems. J Am Coll Dent. 1991;58(2): 36-39.
Attar N, Korkmaz Y. Effect of two light-emitting diode (LED) and one halogen curing light on the microleakage of Class V flowable composite restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2007;8(2):80-8.
Pashley DH. Clinical considerations of microleakage. J Endod. 1990;16(2):70-7.
Sadeghi M. The effect of fluid composite as gingival layer on microleakage of class II composite restorations. Dent Res J. 2007;4(1):40-7.
Patel P, Shah M, Agrawal N, Desai P, Tailor K, Patel K. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of Class II cavities restored with different bulk fill composite restorative systems: An in vitro Study. J Res Adv Dent. 2016;5(2):52-62.
Lindberg A, van Dijken JW, Lindberg M. Nine-year evaluation of a polyacid-modified resin composite/resin composite open sandwich technique in Class II cavities. J Dent. 2007 Feb 1;35(2):124-9.
Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater J. 2005 Jan 1;21(1):68-74.
Roggendorf MJ, Kramer N, Appelt A, Naumann M, Frankenberger R. Marginal quality of flowable 4-mm base vs. conventionally layered resin composite. J Dent. 2011;39(10):643–7.
Bavaria SR, Shah NC, Shah RP, Makati DJ. A comparative evaluation of microleakage of two different bulk fill composites with Ever X Posterior composite for Class II restorations by dye extraction method- An in vitro study. IOSRJ Dent Med Sci. 2017;16(3):72-77.
Todd S. Scientific Documentation: Cention N IvoclarVivadent AG Research & Development Scientific Service October 2016.
Perdigao J. Dentin bonding—Variables related to the clinical situation and the substrate treatment. Dent Mater J. 2010 Feb 1;26(2):e24-37.
Bausch JR, de Lange K, Davidson CL, Peters A, de Gee AJ. Clinical significance of polymerization shrinkage of composite resins. J Prosthet Dent. 1982;48(1):59-62.
Swapna MU, Koshy S, Kumar A, Nanjappa N, Benjamin S, Nainan MT. Comparing marginal microleakage of three bulk fill composites in Class II cavities using confocal microscope: An in vitro study.JConserv Dent. 2015;18(5):409-13.
Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and contraction stress of dental resin composites. DentMater J. 2005 Dec 1;21(12):1150-7.
Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of microleakage around dental restorations: A review.OperDent.1997;22(4):173-185.
Kidd EA. Microleakage: A review. J Dent. 1976;4(5 )199-206.
Malmstrom HS, Schlueter M, Roach T, Moss ME. Effect of thickness of flowable resins on marginal leakage in class II composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2002;27(4):373-3
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;28(5): 635-641.
Sarfi S, Bali D, Grewal MS. Effect of different layering techniques on microleakage of nanofilled composite in class I restorations: An In Vitro study. J IntClinDentResOrgan. 2017;9(1):8.
Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, Nixon P. Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review. Br DentJ. 2017;222(5):337.
Singhal S, Gurtu A, Singhal A, Bansal R, Mohan S. Effect of Different Composite Restorations on the Cuspal Deflection of Premolars Restored with Different Insertion Techniques-An In vitro Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017;11(8):ZC67.
Lassila LV, Nagas E, Vallittu PK, Garoushi S. Translucency of flowable bulk-filling composites of various thicknesses. Chin J Dent Res. 2012;15(1):31.
Flury S, Hayoz S, Peutzfeldt A, Hüsler J, Lussi A. Depth of cure of resin composites: is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials?Dent Mater J. 2012;28(5):521-8.
Chole D, Shah H, Kundoor S, Bakle S, Gandhi N, Hatte N. In Vitro Comparision of Flexural Strength of Cention-N, BulkFill Composites, Light-Cure Nanocomposites and Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Cement. IOSRJ Dent Med Sci. 2018;17(10):79-82.
Moosavi H, Moghaddas MJ, Kordnoshahri F, Zanjani M. Microleakage Evaluation of Bulk-fill Composites Used with Different Adhesive Systems. J Dent Biomater. 2018;5(2):544-50.
Gupta N, Jaiswal S, Nikhil V, Gupta S, Jha P, Bansal P. Comparison of fluoride ion release and alkalizing potential of a new bulk-fill alkasite. J Conserv Dent. 2019;22(3):296-299.
Ciucchi B, Bouillaguet S, Holz J. Proximal adaptation and marginal seal of posterior composite resin restorations placed with direct and indirect techniques. Quintessence Int. 1990;21(5): 663-669.
Watson TF, Boyde A. Confocal light microscopic techniques for examining dental operative procedures and dental materials. Am J Dent. 1991;4(4):193-200.
Kim JY, Takahashi Y, Kito M, Morimoto Y, Hasegawa J. Semi-quantitative analyses of early microleakage around amalgam restorations by fluorescent spectrum method: A laboratory study. DentMater J. 1992;11(1):45
Almeida JB, Platt JA, Oshida Y, Moore BK, Cochran MA, Eckert GJ. Three different methods to evaluate microleakage of packable composites in Class II restorations. Oper Dent. 2003;28(4):453-60.
Minsky M. Memoir on inventing the Confocal scanning microscope. Scanning. 1988; 10(4):128-38.
Lopes MB, Consani S, Gonini-Junior A, Moura SK,McCabe JF. Comparision of microleakage in human and bovine substrates using confocal microscopy. Bull Tokyo Dent Coll. 2009;50(3):111-116.
Nanda BD, Sharma P, Moudgil M, Sharma V, Gupta AK, Gupta D. In vitro Evaluation and Comparison of Microleakage of Two Restorative Composite Resins in Class II Situations using Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy. J Contemp Dent. 2018;19(9):1100-4.
Radhika M, Girija S Rajjan, Kumaraswamy B N, Neetu Mittal. Effect of different placement techniques on marginal microleakage of deep class II cavities restored with two composite resin formulations. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(1):9-15.
Bala O, Uçtasli MB, Unlu I.The Leakage of Class II Cavities Restored with Packable Resin-Based Composites. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2003;4(4):001-11.
Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Swift EJ. Art and science of operative dentistry. 5th ed. St. Louis,Missour: Elsevier Inc;2006.
Deliperi S, Bardwell DN. An alternative method to reduce polymerization shrinkage in direct posterior composite restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2002;133(10):1387-98.
Pawar M, Agwan MA, Ghani B,Khatri M, Bopache P, Aziz MS. Evaluation of Class II restoration microleakage with various restorative materials: A comparative In vitro study.J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci.2021;13(Suppl 2):S1210.
Bilgrami A, Alam MK, Qazi FU, Maqsood A, Basha S, Ahmed N, Syed KA, Mustafa M, Shrivastava D, Nagarajappa AK, Srivastava KC. An In-Vitro Evaluation of Microleakage in Resin-Based Restorative Materials at Different Time Intervals. Polymers. 2022;14(3):466.
Sahadev C K, Bharath M J, Sandeep R, Remya Mohan, Santhosh P Sagar. An-Invitro Comparative Evaluation of Marginal Microleakage of Cention-N with Bulk-fill SDR and ZIRCONOMER: A Confocal Microscopic Study. IntJ Sci Res. 2018;7(7):635-8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Nawal Abdul Aziz, Ranjini M.A, Sowmya Kavoor, Saeeda Patel, Parvathy P, Roopa R Nadig
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
