The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 21 , ISSUE 7 ( July, 2020 ) > List of Articles


Microleakage of a Self-adhesive Composite of Class V Cavities: Effect of Surface Treatment and Thermocycling

Sara Valizadeh, S Fatemeh Hashemi, Sedighe S Hashemikamangar, Mohammad J Kharazifard

Citation Information : Valizadeh S, Hashemi SF, Hashemikamangar SS, Kharazifard MJ. Microleakage of a Self-adhesive Composite of Class V Cavities: Effect of Surface Treatment and Thermocycling. J Contemp Dent Pract 2020; 21 (7):781-786.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2878

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 30-10-2020

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2020; The Author(s).


Aim: This study aimed to assess the microleakage of a self-adhesive composite compared to conventional composites in class V cavities. Materials and methods: In this in vitro experimental study, standard class V cavities were prepared in the buccal surface of 204 extracted teeth and randomly divided into six groups for restoration with (A) Vertiseflow (Kerr) self-adhesive composite, (B) acid etching (Kerr) + Vertiseflow, (C) acid etching + Optibond FL (Kerr) + Vertiseflow, (D) Er,Cr:YSGG laser + Vertiseflow, (E) acid etching + Optibond FL + Premise Flowable (Kerr), and (F) acid etching + Optibond FL + Z250 (3M). The teeth in each group were then randomly divided into two subgroups of with and without thermocycling (10,000 cycles between 5°C and 55°C). The microleakage was then determined at the enamel and dentin margins under a stereomicroscope using the dye penetration method. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test (α = 0.05). Results: No significant difference was noted in occlusal margin microleakage of no thermocycling groups, but acid etching + Vertiseflow showed the highest microleakage. At the gingival margin, the difference between acid etching + bonding agent + Z250 and laser + Vertiseflow was significant (p = 0.004). In thermocycling groups, the difference in the microleakage at the occlusal margin of Vertiseflow with that of acid etching + bonding agent + Premise (p = 0.002), acid etching + bonding agent + Vertiseflow (p = 0.009), and acid etching + bonding agent + Z250 (p = 0.037) groups was significant. The difference in the microleakage at the dentin margin was also significant among the groups (p < 0.05). The highest and the lowest microleakages were noted in laser + Vertiseflow and acid etching + bonding agent + Vertiseflow groups, respectively. Conclusion: Surface preparation with etching and adhesive application results in lower microleakage in class V cavities. But laser irradiation and the use of self-adhesive composite increase the microleakage. Clinical significance: It seems that self-adhesive composites cannot provide acceptable marginal integrity without any surface treatment.

  1. Van Meerbeek B, De Munck J, Yoshida Y, et al. Buonocore memorial lecture. Adhesion to enamel and dentin: current status and future challenges. Oper Dent 2003;28(3):215–235.
  2. Peumans M, Kanumilli P, De Munck J, et al. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives: a systematic review of current clinical trials. Dent Mater 2005;21(9):864–881.
  3. Shafiei L, Mojiri P, Ghahraman Y, et al. Microleakage of a self-adhesive class V composite on primary and permanent dentitions. J Contemp Dent Pract 2013;14(3):461–467.
  4. Asefzadeh F, Jamshidian M, Molaei N. Microleakage of wetbond self adhesive composite in class V cavities. J Mash Dent Sch 2010;34(2): 99–108.
  5. Yuan H, Li M, Guo B, et al. Evaluation of microtensile bond strength and microleakage of a self-adhering flowable composite. J Adhes Dent 2015;17(6):535–543.
  6. Moosavi H, Moazzami SM, Loh S, et al. Microleakage evaluation of core buildup composite resins with total-etch and self-etch adhesive systems. J Contemp Dent Pract 2010;11(2):009–016.
  7. De Munck J, Vargas M, Van Landuyt K, et al. Bonding of an auto-adhesive luting material to enamel and dentin. Dent Mater 2004;20(10):963–971.
  8. Arami S, Tabatabaei MH, Namdar F, et al. Shear bond strength of the repair composite resin to zirconia ceramic by different surface treatments. J Lasers Med Sci 2014;5(4):171–175.
  9. Hashemikamangar SS, Hasanitabatabaee M, Kalantari S, et al. Bond strength of fiber posts to composite core: effect of surface treatment with Er,Cr:YSGG laser and thermocycling. J Lasers Med Sci 2018;9(1):36–42.
  10. Baur V, Ilie N. Repair of dental resin-based composites. Clin Oral Invest 2013;17:601–608.
  11. International Standards Organization. ISO Standard 11405:2003: dental materials-testing of adhesion to tooth structure. Geneva: The Organization; 2003.
  12. Sadeghi M. An in vitro microleakage study of class V cavities restored with a new self-adhesive flowable composite resin vs different flowable materials. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2102;9(4):461–465.
  13. Celik EU, Kucukyilmaz E, Savas S. Effect of different surface pre-treatment methods on the microleakage of two different self-adhesive composites in class V cavities. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2015;16(1):33–33.
  14. Sharafeddin F, Koohpeima F, Palizian B. Evaluation of microleakage in class V cavities filled with methacrylate-based vs silorane-based composites. J Dent Biomater 2015;2(2):67–72.
  15. Idriss S, Abduljabbar T, Habib C, et al. Factors associated with microleakage in class II resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2007;32(1):60–66.
  16. Ben Amar A, Slutzky H, Matalon S. The influence of 2 condensation techniques on the marginal seal of packable resin composite restorations. Quintessence Int 2007;38(5):423–428.
  17. Sooraparaju SG, Kanumuru PK, Nujella SK, et al. A comparative evaluation of microleakage in class v composite restorations. Int J Dent 2014;2014:685643.
  18. Tabatabaei MH, Arami S, Khajavi F, et al. Effect of type of cavity preparation (bur,er:YAG laser) and restorative materials on prevention of caries lesion. J Dent Med 2017;29(4):229–236. [Persian].
  19. Davari A, Kazemi AD, Mousavinasab M, et al. In vitro microleakage evaluation of total-etch and self-etch bonding systems. Shiraz Univ Dent J 2010;11(1):28–34.
  20. Gönülol N, Ertaş E, Yılmaz A, et al. Effect of thermal aging on microleakage of current flowable composite resins. J Dent Sci 2015;10(4):376–382.
  21. Moslemi M, Fotouhi Ardakani F, Javadi F, et al. Evaluation of Er,Cr:YSGG laser effect on Microshear bond strength of a self-adhesive flowable composite in the dentin of permanent molar: an in vitro study. Scientifica (Cairo) 2016;2016:4856285.
  22. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yudhira R, et al. Micro-tensile bond strength of two adhesives to erbium:YAG-lased vs. Bur-cut enamel and dentin. Eur J Oral Sci 2002;110(4):322–329.
  23. Synarellis A, Kouros P, Koulaouzidou E, et al. In vitro microleakage of class V composite restorations prepared by Er,Cr:YSGG laser and carbide BUR balkan. J Dent Med 2017;21:24–31. DOI: 10.1515/bjdm-2017-0004, Retrieved 10 Apr. 2018, from.
  24. Tuna EB, Ozel E, Kasimoglu Y, et al. Investigation of the ER:YAG laser and diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of class V cavities restored with different flowable composites. Microsc Res Tech 2017;80(5):530–536.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.