Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Three Different Generation Dentin Bonding Agents and Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement: An In-Vitro StudyCorrespondence Address :
Rushikesh Ramesh Mahaparale,
School of Dental Sciences, Karad, Maharashtra, India.
Introduction: In order to ensure that there is no occurrence of recurrent caries, post-operative sensitivity and marginal staining, it is important that the material used for restorative purposes achieves good seal with the adjacent tooth structure and causes minimal microleakage. Numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate microleakage of different adhesive systems but none of the materials used, showed complete reduction in microleakage. As no adhesive systems were found to eliminate microleakage at dentin margins, use of a resin-modified glass ionomer as a base can be recommended.
Aim: To evaluate microleakage of three different bonding agents and compared with resin modified glass ionomer at coronal and apical margins of class V restorations.
Materials and Methods: For this in-vitro study done in February 2019, total sixty extracted human upper premolars were selected and randomly divided into four groups of 15 teeth each (30 cavity preparations). Class V cavity preparations were done on buccal and lingual surfaces with occlusal margins in enamel and gingival margins in cementum. In 3 experimental groups, cavities were treated with Adper Single-Bond 2, Adper SE Plus and Adper Easy One as dentin bonding agents. Cavities were restored with composite. Fourth experimental group was restored with resin modified glass ionomer cement (Vitremer). All specimens were thermocycled, stained with methylene blue dye, and sectioned to evaluate dye penetration. Statistical analysis was done using Kruskall Wallis test and Mann-Whitney test with significant p-value <0.05 and result was expressed through sum of ranks.
Results: At enamel margins, Adper Single Bond (mean±sd 0.57±0.73) 2 and Vitremer (0.43±0.63) showed the lowest mean leakage. Adper Easy One (1.83±1.15) showed highest mean leakage. At cementum margins, Vitremer showed lowest mean leakage (mean±sd 0.47±0.63) and Adper Single Bond (2.97±1.22) 2 showed highest mean leakage.
Conclusion: It can be concluded that in comparison with the dentin bonding agents used in this study Vitremer has a better sealing ability at both coronal (enamel) and apical (dentin/cementum) margins.
Adper easy, Adper single-bond 2, Adper SE plus, Microleakage, Stereomicroscope, Vitremer
Date of Submission: Feb 20, 2020
Date of Peer Review: Apr 07, 2020
Date of Acceptance: May 04, 2020
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2020
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? NA
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 03, 2020
• Manual Googling: May 01, 2020
• iThenticate Software: May 23, 2020 (21%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)