Dental Journal of Advance Studies

Register      Login

VOLUME 3 , ISSUE 2 ( May-August, 2015 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Evaluation of Microleakage in Posterior Nanocomposite Restorations with Adhesive Liners

Sandeep Singh Reyal, Ashu Gupta, Bhanu Pratap Singh

Keywords : Microleakage, Flowable Composite, Glass Ionomer Cements, Methylene Blue

Citation Information : Reyal SS, Gupta A, Singh BP. Evaluation of Microleakage in Posterior Nanocomposite Restorations with Adhesive Liners. 2015; 3 (2):97-102.

DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1672022

License: NA

Published Online: 10-09-2015

Copyright Statement:  NA


Microleakage is the clinically detectable passage of bacteria, fluids, molecules or ions between a cavity wall and the restorative materials applied to it. This study was conducted to evaluate and compare the microleakage in Class II nanocomposite restorations, with resin-modified glass ionomer liner(group I), nanofilled flowable composite liner(group II) & without liner(group III). Thirty six non carious upper premolar teeth extracted for orthodontic purposes were selected. Standard class II cavities were prepared. The teeth were then randomly & equally divided into three groups with 12 teeth in each group. The teeth were subjected to thermocycling. After that apex of each tooth was sealed with acrylic resin and the teeth were painted with two coats of nail varnish, except for the area of 2 mm from the periphery of the restorations. The coated teeth were immersed in buffered (Ph 7) 0.5% methylene blue dye for 48 hours. Teeth were sectioned & observed under stereomicroscope of 10X magnification. At gingival level, Group I exhibited slightly lesser microleakage than group II but was not statistically significant. Group I showed no significant difference between microleakage at occlusal and gingival level (Z=1.732; P=0.083). However, in Group II and Group III, there was significantly greater microleakage at the gingival level (Z= 2.162 and 3.162; P=0.002 and 0.002, respectively). Both resin-modified glass ionomer and flowable composite can be used as liners under nano composite restorations as reduction in microleakage was comparable.

PDF Share
  1. Douglas A. Terry, Direct applications of nanocomposite resin system: Part I - The evolution of contemporary composite materials. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2004;16(6):418.
  2. Türkün LS, Aktener BO, and Ates M Clinical evalutation of different posterior resin composite materials: A 7-year report. Quint Int 2003;34:418-426.
  3. Herrero AA, Yaman P, and Dennison JB. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of packable composites. Quint Int 2005;36:25-31.
  4. Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An application of nanotechnology on advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134:1382–1390.
  5. Gupta S. Khinda VIS Grewal N. A Comparative study of Microleakage below Cemento-enameljunction using Light Cure and Chemically Cured glass lonomer cement liners. J Indian Soc Pedo Prev Dent December 2002; 20(4):158-184.
  6. Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Jr, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson P. A characterization of first generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998;129:567–577.
  7. Attar N, Tam LE, McComb D. Flow, strength, stiffness and radioopacity of flowable resin composites. J Can Dent Assoc 2003; 61:516–521.
  8. Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent 2001;26:302–7.
  9. Cobb DS, Macgregor KM, Vargas MA, and Denehy GE. The physical properties of packable and conventional posterior resin-based composites: a comparison. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131:1610-1615.
  10. Hickel R and Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 2001; 3:45-64.
  11. Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci 1997; 105:97–116.
  12. Sheth JJ, Jensen ME, Sheth PJ, Versteeg J. Effect of etching glassionomer cements on bond strength to composite resin. J Dent Res 1989; 68:1082-7.
  13. Arora V, Kundabala M, Parolia A, Thomas MS, Pai V. Comparison of the shear bond strength of RMGIC to a resin composite using different adhesive systems: An invitro study. J Conserv Dent 2010;13:80-3.
  14. Liebenberg WH. Successive cusp build-up: an improved placement technique for posterior direct resin restorations. J Can Dent Assoc 1996;62:501-7.
  15. Yazici RA, Celik C, and Ozgunaltay G. Microleakage of different resin composite types. Quint Int 2004; 23(10):790-794.
  16. Van Meerbeek B, Willens G, Celis JP, Roos JR, Lambrechts P and Vanherle G. Assesment by nanoindentation of the hardness and elasticity of the resin–dentin bonding area. J Dent Res 1993; 72:1434–1442.
  17. Owens BM. The effect of different drying methods for single step adhesive systems on microleakage of tooth colored restorations J Contemp Dent Pract 2002; 3(4):1-10.
  18. Sidhu SK, Henderson LJ. In vitro marginal leakage of cervical composite resins restorations lined with a light-cured glass ionomer. Oper Dent 1992;17:7-12.
  19. Aboushala A, Kugel G, Hurley E. Class II composite resin restorations using glass-ionomer liners: Microleakage studies. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1996;21:67-70.
  20. Tollidos K, Setcos JC. Initial degree of polymerization shrinkage exhibited by flowable composite resins. J Dent Res 1999;78:483-5.
  21. Tredwin CJ, Stokes A, Moles DR. Influence of flowable liners and margin location on microleakage of conventional and packable class II resin composites. Oper Dent 2005;30:32-8.
  22. Chuang SF, Jin YT, Liu JK, Chang CH, Shieh DB. Influence of flowable lining thickness on class II composite restorations. Oper Dent 2004;29:301-8.
  23. Derhami K, Colli P, Brannstrom M. Microleakage in Class 2 composite restorations. Oper Dent 1995;20:100-5.
  24. Demarco FF, Ramos OL, Mota CS, Formolo E, Justino ML. Influence of different restorative techniques on microleakage in class II cavities with gingival wall in cementum. Oper Dent 2001; 26:253-9.
  25. Hilton TJ, Schwartz RS, Ferracane JL. Microleakage of four class II resin composite insertion techniques at intraoral temperature. Quint Int 1997; 28(2): 135-145.
  26. Davidson CL. Glass-ionomer bases under posterior composites. J Esthet Dent 1994;6:223-4.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.