IADR Abstract Archives
In Vitro Comparison of Microleakage of Bulk-fill Resin Composite restorations in ClassII cavity
Objectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the microleakage score at occlusal and gingival margins of classII cavity, restored with bulk-fill resin composites [FiltekTM Bulk Fill Posterior Restoration=FBF, SonicFillTM =SF, Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk Fill=TNF and X-tra fil=XF]and nanofill resin composite (FiltekTM Z350 XT=Z350) restorations.
Methods: . One hundred sound extracted human upper premolars were prepared for class II (slot) cavities (4 mm. in width and depth). The prepared teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups (n=20) and restored with five resin composites following the manufacturer’s recommendations. All the restored teeth were subjected to 500 thermal cycles in water at 55oC and 5oC and immersed into the 2% methylene blue dye solution for 24 hours. The restored teeth were sectioned in mesiodistal and horizontal direction. All specimens with marginal dye penetration were evaluated microleakage score using polarized light microscope and scanning electron microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using One-way ANOVA and bonferroni test at 95% confidence interval.
Results: At occlusal margin, Average microleakage score (mm.) and standard deviation (SD) of Z350, FBF, SF, TNF and XF are 0.24±0.12,
0.35±0.12, 0.23±0.11,0.30±0.14 and 0.51±0.18 respectively. At gingival margin, Average microleakage score (mm.) and standard deviation (SD) of Z350, FBF, SF, TNF and XF are 0.59±0.17, 0.77±0.21, 0.76±0.15, 0.82±0.16 and 0.75±0.16 respectively.
Conclusions: X-tra fil presented the highest mean of microleakage score at occlusal margin. FiltekTM Z350 XT presented the lowest mean of microleakage score at gingival margin. There were no significant differences in the mean microleakage scores at gingival margins of all four bulk-fill resin composite restorations (p>0.05).
Methods: . One hundred sound extracted human upper premolars were prepared for class II (slot) cavities (4 mm. in width and depth). The prepared teeth were randomly divided into 5 groups (n=20) and restored with five resin composites following the manufacturer’s recommendations. All the restored teeth were subjected to 500 thermal cycles in water at 55oC and 5oC and immersed into the 2% methylene blue dye solution for 24 hours. The restored teeth were sectioned in mesiodistal and horizontal direction. All specimens with marginal dye penetration were evaluated microleakage score using polarized light microscope and scanning electron microscope. Statistical analysis was performed using One-way ANOVA and bonferroni test at 95% confidence interval.
Results: At occlusal margin, Average microleakage score (mm.) and standard deviation (SD) of Z350, FBF, SF, TNF and XF are 0.24±0.12,
0.35±0.12, 0.23±0.11,0.30±0.14 and 0.51±0.18 respectively. At gingival margin, Average microleakage score (mm.) and standard deviation (SD) of Z350, FBF, SF, TNF and XF are 0.59±0.17, 0.77±0.21, 0.76±0.15, 0.82±0.16 and 0.75±0.16 respectively.
Conclusions: X-tra fil presented the highest mean of microleakage score at occlusal margin. FiltekTM Z350 XT presented the lowest mean of microleakage score at gingival margin. There were no significant differences in the mean microleakage scores at gingival margins of all four bulk-fill resin composite restorations (p>0.05).