The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 7 ( November, 2007 ) > List of Articles


Effect of a Resin-based Desensitizing Agent and a Self-etching Dentin Adhesive on Marginal Leakage of Amalgam Restorations

Samin Alavi, Marjaneh Ghavamnasiri, Mohammad Alavi

Citation Information : Alavi S, Ghavamnasiri M, Alavi M. Effect of a Resin-based Desensitizing Agent and a Self-etching Dentin Adhesive on Marginal Leakage of Amalgam Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007; 8 (7):54-61.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-8-7-54

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-01-2009

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2007; The Author(s).



The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal leakage of Class II amalgam restorations whose preparations were lined with a resin-based desensitizing agent, a self-etching adhesive system, and copal varnish.

Methods and Materials

Fifty-six freshly extracted human premolar teeth were divided into four groups. A Class II preparation was prepared with only a proximal box on the mesial and distal surfaces of each tooth. The cavities in one group were lined with a desensitizing agent (VivaSens™) and a second group with an adhesive (Clearfil S3 Bond™). A third group was lined with copal varnish (Copalite™) and a fourth group was used as the control without any cavity liner. Spherical high copper amalgam was hand-condensed into each preparation, specimens were thermocycled, stained, and sectioned. Microleakage was graded using a stereomicroscope. Microleakage scores were calculated and analyzed using the Kruskal Wallis and the Mann-Whitney tests (α=0.05).


Less microleakage was indicated with the VivaSens™ liner when compared with the other groups (P<0. 05). Clearfil S3 Bond™ showed less microleakage than the control group (P<0.05), but the leakage with copal varnish and Clearfil S3 Bond™ was similar (P>0.05).


VivaSens™ reduced the microleakage of Class II high copper amalgam restorations significantly more than the Clearfil S3 Bond™ and copal varnish.


Ghavamnasiri M, Alavi M, Alavi S. Effect of a Resin-based Desensitizing Agent and a Self-etching Dentin Adhesive on Marginal Leakage of Amalgam Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2007 November; (8)7:054-061.

PDF Share
  1. Bonding of amalgam restorations: existing knowledge and future prospects. Oper Dent 2000;25:121-129.
  2. Marginal integrity of bonded amalgam restorations. Am J of Dent 1996;9:72-76.
  3. Microleakage of dentin/amalgam alloy bonding agents: results after 1 year. Oper Dent 1998;23:30-35.
  4. The cause of postrestorative sensitivity and its prevention. J Endod 1986;12:457-481.
  5. Effect of bonded amalgam restorations on microlekage. Oper Dent 1999;24:203-209.
  6. An in vitro study of coronal microleakage around bonded amalgam coronal radicular cores in endodotically treated molar teeth. Quintessence Int 2002;33:22-29.
  7. Microleakage in bonded amalgam restorations using different adhesive materials. Braz Dent J 2004;15:13-18.
  8. Amalgam type, adhesive system, and storage period as influencing factors on microleakage of amalgam restorations J Prosthet Dent 2003;90;255-260.
  9. Long-term monitoring of microlekage of different amalgams with different liners. J Prosthet Dent 2005;93:571-576.
  10. Bonded amalgam restoration: Microlekage and tensile bond strength. Oper Dent 2005:30;228-233.
  11. Effectives of desensitizing agents. J Endod. 2002;28:34-35.
  12. Effect of desensitizing agents on the hydraulic conductance of human dentin subjected to different surface pretreatments-an in vitro study. Dent Mater 2005;21:129-138.
  13. Efficiency and cytotoxicity of resin–based desensitizing agents. Am J Dent 2002:15:300-304.
  14. Dentin hypersensitivity-a review. Clinical and in vitro evaluation of treatment agents. J Clin Periodontol 1983;10:351-363.
  15. Effect of intrinsic wetness and regional difference on dentin bond strength. Dent Mater 1999;15:46-53.
  16. Effect of cavity varnish, amalgam liner or dentin bonding agents on the marginal leakage of amalgam restorations. J Oral Rehabil 2001;28:492-496.
  17. Microlekage in conventional and bonded amalgam restorations: influence of cavity volume. Oper Dent 2006;31:377-383.
  18. Reduction of microleakage around new amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1989;119:725-728.
  19. Microleakage of a new cavity varnish with a high copper spherical amalgam alloy. Oper Dent 1990;15:136-140.
  20. The influence of the dentin smear layer on adhesion; a self etching primer vs a total- etch system. Dent Mater 2003;19:758-767.
  21. Microleakage of bonded amalgam restorations: effect of thermal cycling. Oper Dent 2000; 25:316-323.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.