The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2007 ) > List of Articles


Effect of Centripetal and Incremental Methods in Class II Composite Resin Restorations on Gingival Microleakage

Horieh Moosavi, Marjaneh Ghavamnasiri, Najmeh Tahvildarnejad

Citation Information : Moosavi H, Ghavamnasiri M, Tahvildarnejad N. Effect of Centripetal and Incremental Methods in Class II Composite Resin Restorations on Gingival Microleakage. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007; 8 (2):113-120.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-8-2-113

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-02-2007

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2007; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.



The aim of this study was to evaluate the microleakage at gingival margins below the cementoenamel junction (CEJ) of Class II composite restorations using various placement techniques.

Methods and Materials

Sound human maxillary premolars were selected. Eighty slot-style cavities on the mesial or distal surfaces were prepared with the cervical margins located apical to the CEJ. The specimens were divided into two groups based on the restorative technique utilized (centripetal or incremental). Each group was then categorized into two subgroups according to the type of matrix used resulting in a total of four experimental groups as follows: IP=Incremental and Palodent matrix, IT = Incremental and Transparent matrix, CP = Centripetal and Palodent matrix, and CT = Centripetal and Transparent matrix.

Following restoration with a total etch adhesive (Single Bond) and a resin composite (Z100), the teeth were thermocycled. Then specimens were immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours at a temperature of 37°C. Sectioned restorations were examined under a stereomicroscope (40X magnification), and the extent of the microleakage was scored and recorded. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric statistical test (P=0.05).


In the four groups of the study no significant differences in the mean rank of microleakage were observed (p>0.05).


When the gingival margin was located on cementum, the kind of matrix and filling technique did not reduce the microleakage.


Ghavamnasiri M, Moosavi H, Tahvildarnejad N. Effect of Centripetal and Incremental Methods in Class II Composite Resin Restorations on Gingival Microleakage. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007 February;(8)2:113-120.

PDF Share
  1. The effect of flowable resin composite on microleakage and internal voids in Class II Composite restorations. Oper Dent 2004;29:713-719.
  2. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymerbased restoratives. J Dent 1997;25:435-440.
  3. Curing contraction of composites and glass ionomer cements. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:297-300.
  4. Current status of adhesive resin systems. J Am Coll Dent 1991;58:36-39.
  5. Microleakage around dental restorations: A summarizing review. JADA 1972;84:1349-1357.
  6. An in vitro study of the effect of restorative technique on marginal leakage in posterior composites. Oper Dent 1998;23:282-9.
  7. Improved proximal margin adaptation of Class II composite resin restorations by use of light –reflecting wedges. Quint Int 1986;17:659-64.
  8. Marginal adaptation of Class II composite fillings: guided polymerization vs reduced light intensity. J Adhes Dent 1999;1:31-9.
  9. An in vitro comparison of metal and transparent matrices used for bonded Class II resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2003;28:122-126.
  10. Elimination of polymerization stresses at the margins of posterior composite resin restorations: A new restorative technique. Quint Int 1986;17:777-784.
  11. The centripetal build-up for composite resin restorations. Pract Periodontics Aesthet Dent 1994;6:17-23.
  12. The effect of flowable resin composite on microleakage in class V Cavities. Oper Dent 2003;28:42-46.
  13. Evaluation of marginal microleakage in class II cavities: effect of microhybrid, flowable, and compactable resins. Quint Int 2003;34:93-98.
  14. Three–dimensionl reconstruction of microleakage pattern using a sequential grinding technique. J Dent 1994;22:370-375.
  15. Influence of the number of sections on reliability of in vitro microleakage evaluations. Am J Dent 2003;16:207-210.
  16. Adhesive restoratives in posterior teeth: rationale for the application of direct techniques. Oper Dent 2001;6:191-197.
  17. Dose an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996; 75: 871-878.
  18. Comparative study of composite resin placement: Centripetal buildup versus incremental technique. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2001;13:243-250.
  19. Microleakage of resin – based Liner materials and condensable composites using filled and unfilled adhesives. Am J Dent 2003;16:351-355.
  20. Microleakage comparison in opaque and transparent matrix systems. Gen Dentistry 1989;37: 482-484.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.