The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 6 , ISSUE 4 ( November, 2005 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Effect of Placement Techniques on the Marginal Adaptation of Class V Composite Restorations

Luis Guilherme Sensi, Fabiano Carlos Marson, Luiz Narciso Baratieri, Sylvio Monteiro Junior

Citation Information : Sensi LG, Marson FC, Baratieri LN, Junior SM. Effect of Placement Techniques on the Marginal Adaptation of Class V Composite Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2005; 6 (4):17-25.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-6-4-17

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-11-2005

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2005; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Statement of the Problem

Several techniques are proposed for the restoration of Class V cavities but there is no agreement in the literature as to which technique is more effective.

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of different techniques of composite increment placement on the marginal adaptation of Class V restorations.

Methods and Materials

Twenty-four human molars were selected and prepared with standardized saucershaped cavity dimensions of 3.0 mm (occlusal-gingival), 2.0 mm (mesial-distal), and 2.0 mm (depth). The margins are in reference to the cemento-enamel junction with 1.5 mm being located on enamel and 1.5 mm on dentin. The cavities were randomly assigned into three groups (n=8) and restored with composites as follows: Group 1, the occlusal increment was placed and cured first followed by the gingival increment; Group 2, the gingival increment was placed and cured first followed by the occlusal increment; and Group 3, the cavities were restored with one bulk increment. Restorations were immediately finished and stored for 24 h in tap water. Specimens were subjected to thermocycling (1000 cycles, 5°C to 55°C, 30 s dwell time) and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin solution for 24 h in room temperature. After rinsing with running water, the restorations were sectioned longitudinally and enamel and dentin margins were evaluated and scored according to the microleakage on a 0-3 scale. Data were subjected to Kruskal-Wallis test at p<0.05.

Results

Median of microleakage scores for all evaluated groups was zero. No statistical difference was observed among the three groups both in enamel (p = 0.5929) and dentin (p = 0.3679) margins

Conclusion

The placement technique did not influence the marginal adaptation of moderate Class V restorations.

Clinical Significance

No differences on marginal adaptation were observed when restoring conservative Class V cavities using incremental or bulk placement techniques.

Citation

Sensi LG, Marson FC, Baratieri LN, Junior SM. Effect of Placement Techniques on the Marginal Adaptation of Class V Composite Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2005 November;(6)4:017-025.


PDF Share
  1. Evaluation of materials and techniques for restoration of erosion areas. J Prosth Dent 1986;55:434-442.
  2. Marginal adaptation of Class V restorations using different restorative techniques. J Dent 1991;19:24-32.
  3. Non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent 1994;22:195-207.
  4. The Class V lesion - aetiology and restoration. Aust Dent J 1995;40:167-170.
  5. Dental materials for the restoration of root surface caries. Am J Dent 1995;8:342-351.
  6. Treating root-surface caries. Dent Clin of North Am 2002;46:385-404.
  7. Dental adhesion: present state of the art and future perspectives. Quintessence Int 2002;33:213-224.
  8. A comparative study of the effects of dentinal bonding agents and application techniques on marginal gaps in Class V cavities. J Dent Res 1987;66:716-721.
  9. In vitro marginal quality of dentin-bonded composite resins in Class V cavities. Quintessence Int 1989;20:407-412.
  10. Mixed Class V restorations: the potential of a dentine bonding agent. J Dent 1990;18:263-270.
  11. Resistance of cementum in Class II and V cavities to penetration by an adhesive system. Dent Mater 1997;13:157-162.
  12. Increment technique for extended Class V restorations: an experimental study. Oper Dent 2003;28:352-356.
  13. Effect of resin viscosity and enamel beveling on the clinical performance of class V composite restorations: three-year results. Oper Dent 2003;28:482-487.
  14. Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow in dental composites. J Dent Res 1984;63:146-148.
  15. Marginal sealing of curing contraction gaps in Class V composite resin restorations. J Dent Res 1988;67:841-845.
  16. Microleakage: a review. J Dent 1976;4:199-206.
  17. Communication between the oral cavity and the dental pulp associated with restorative treatment. Oper Dent 1984;9:57-68.
  18. Use of a two-stage composite resin fill to reduce microleakage below the cementoenamel junction. Oper Dent 1988;13:20-23.
  19. Microleakage of three resin placement techniques. Am J Dent 1991;4:69-72.
  20. Microleakage of Class V composite, resin sandwich, and resinmodified glass ionomers. Am J Dent 1996;9:96-99.
  21. Effect of composite resin placement techniques on the microleakage of two self-etching dentin-bonding agents. Am J Dent 2001;14:132-136.
  22. Tooth colored restoratives – principles and techniques. 9th Ed. Hamilton: BC Decker Inc, 2002:183-202.
  23. Effect of placement techniques on microleakage of a dentin-bonded composite resin. Quintessence Int 1986;17:21-24.
  24. Effects of bonding agent types and incremental techniques on minimizing contraction gaps around resin composites. Dent Mater 1989;5:218-223.
  25. Comparative microleakage study between the sandwich and conventional three-increment techniques. Quintessence Int 1989;20:587-594.
  26. Marginal seal of cervical tooth-coloured restorations. A laboratory investigation of placement techniques. Austr Dent J 1993;38:102-107.
  27. Clinical status of dentine bonding agents. J Dent 1989;17:209-215.
  28. Effect of composite resin placement and use of an unfilled resin on the microleakage of two dentin bonding agents. Am J Dent 1990;3:153-156.
  29. Marginal seal of a resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material: an investigation of placement techniques. Quintessence Int 1995; 26:729-732.
  30. Microleakage of Class V composites using different placement and curing techniques: an in vitro study. Am J Dent 2002;15:244-247.
  31. An in vitro study of the effectiveness of bonding agents in preventing microleakage in composite restorations of erosion and abrasion lesions. Gen Dent 1989;37:26-28.
  32. Effectiveness of polymerization in composite restoratives claiming bulk placement: Impact of cavity depth and exposure time. Oper Dent 2000;25:113-120.
  33. Quantitative evaluation of marginal leakage of two resin composite restorations using two filling techniques. Oper Dent 2002;27:475-479.
  34. Effect of light curing modes and filling techniques on microleakage of posterior resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2002; 27:557-562.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.