Effect of biscover on the marginal microleakage of composite resin restoration

Young-Gon Cho; Hee-Young Choi

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.5.355

Journal List > J Korean Acad Conserv Dent > v.30(5) > 1056171

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Cho and Choi: Effect of biscover on the marginal microleakage of composite resin restoration

Original Article

Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry

Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2005; 30(5): 355-362.

Published online: 30 September 2005

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2005.30.5.355

Effect of biscover on the marginal microleakage of composite resin restoration

Young-Gon Cho, Hee-Young Choi

Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, Korea.

Corresponding author: Young-Gon Cho. Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Chosun University, 421 Seosuk-dong, Dong-gu, Gwangju, Korea 501-825. Tel: 82-62-220-3840, 3845, Fax: 82-62-232-9064, ygcho@mail.chosun.ac.kr

Received 3 January 2005 Revised 18 February 2005 Accepted 5 March 2005

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect on marginal leakage of a resin surface sealant (Biscover) applied before or after polymerization of composite resin to unsealed composite restorations. Thirty Class V cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and cervical margin in dentin or cementum were prepared on the buccal surfaces of sound extracted molars and restored with a microfilled light-cured composite resin (Micronew). Restorations were randomly assigned into one of three equal groups (n = 10): a control group - no surface sealing, group 1 - applied Biscover after polymerization of the composite resin, and group 2 - applied Biscover before polymerization of the composite resin. Specimens were thermocycled, immersed in a 2% methylene blue solution for 4 hours, sectioned longitudinally, and analyzed for leakage at the occlusal and gingival margins. The results of this study were as follows;

1. In sealed group, group 2 showed higher microleakage than group 1 at both occlusal and gingival margins, but there was no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05).

2. Unsealed control group showed a little higher microleakage than sealed group at occlusal margins, and a little higher or similar microleakage than sealed group at gingival margins (p > 0.05).

3. Control group and group 2 showed significantly less microleakage at the occlusal margins, but group 1 showed no significantly difference between microleakage at the occlusal and gingival margins.

Keywords: Biscover, Resin surface sealant, Microleakage, Class V cavity, Occlusal margin or gingival margin

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Group classification by application methods of Biscover

Table 2

Distribution of microleakage scores and mean rank at occlusal margins

Table 3

Distribution of microleakage scores and mean rank at gingival margins

Table 4

Statistical analysis of microleakage at occlusal and gingival margins among groups by Mann-Whitney test

NS: No significant differences (p > 0.05)

Table 5

Statistical analysis between microleakage of occlusal and gingival margins in each group by Wilcoxon signed ranked test

S: Microleakage of gingival margins was significant higher than that of occlusal margins (p < 0.05)

NS: No significant differences (p > 0.05)

References

1. Munro GA, Hilton TJ, Hermesch CB. In vitro microleakage of etched and rebonded class 5 composite resin restorations. Oper Dent. 1996. 21:203–208.

2. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Lamberechts P, Vanherle G. Microleakage of adhesive restorative materials. Am J Dent. 2001. 14(3):170–176.

3. Tjan AH, Tan DE. Microleakage at gingival margins of class V composite resin restorations rebonded with various low-viscosity resin systems. Quintessence Int. 1991. 22(7):565–573.

4. Erhardt MCG, Magalhaes CS, Serra MC. The effect of rebonding on microleakage of class V aesthetic restorations. Oper Dent. 2002. 27:396–402.

5. May KN Jr, Swift EJ Jr, Wilder AD, Futrell SC. Effect of a surface sealant on microleakage of Class V restorations. Am J Dent. 1996. 9(3):133–136.

6. Hansen EK. Effect of cavity depth and application technique on marginal adaptation of resin in dentin cavities. J Dent Res. 1986. 65:1319–1321.

7. Sidhu SK, Henderson LJ. In vitro marginal leakage of cervical composite restorations lined with a light-cured glass ionomer. Oper Dent. 1992. 17:7–12.

8. Santini A. Microleakage of resin-based composite restorations using different solvent-based bonding agents and methods of drying acid-etched dentin. Am J Dent. 1999. 12:194–200.

9. Jayasooriya PR, Pereira PNR, Nikaido T, Burrow MF, Tagami J. The effect of a "resin coatingon" the interfacial adaptation of composite inlays. Oper Dent. 2003. 28:28–35.

10. Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y. Effect of low-viscosity resin-based composite on the microleakage of cervical restorations. Am J Dent. 2003. 16:244–248.

11. Unterbrink GL, Muessner R. Influence of light intensity on two restorative systems. J Dent. 1995. 23:183–189.

12. Crim GA. Influence of bonding agents and composites on microleakge. J Prosthet Dent. 1989. 61(5):571–574.

13. Pameijer CH, Wendt SL. Microleakage of "surface-sealing" materials. Am J Dent. 1995. 8(1):43–46.

14. Irie M, Tjandrawinata R, Suzuki K. Effect of delayed polishing periods on interfacial gap formation of class V restorations. Oper Dent. 2003. 28(5):552–559.

15. Akyuz S, Mentes A, Oktay C. The effect of a sealant on the microleakage of composite resin restorations : an in vivo study. J Marmara Univ Dent Fac. 1992. 1(3):211–214.

16. Ramos RP, Chinelatti MA, Chimello DT, Dibb RGP. Assessing microleakage in resin composite restorations rebonded with a surface sealant and three low-viscosity resin systems. Quintessence Int. 2002. 33:450–456.

17. Reid JS, Saunders WP, Chen YY. The effect of bonding agent and fissure sealant on microleakage of composite resin restorations. Quintessence Int. 1991. 22:295–298.

18. Bertrand MF, Leforestier E, Muller M, Lupi-Pegurier L, Bolla M. Effect of surface penetrating sealant on surface texture and microhardness of composite resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 2000. 53(6):658–663.

19. Doray PG, Eldiwany MS, Powers JM. Effect of resin surface sealers on improvement of stain resistance for a composite provisional material. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2003. 15:244–250.

20. Shinkai K, Suzuki S, Leinfelder KF, Katoh Y. Effect of surface-penetrating sealant on resistance of luting agents. Quintessence Int. 1994. 25:767–771.

21. Dickinson GL, Leinfelder KF. Assessing the long-term effect of a surface penetrating sealant. J Am Dent Assoc. 1993. 124(7):68–72.

22. Estafan D, Dussetschleger FL, Miuo LE, Kondamani J. Class V lesions restored with flowable composite and added surface sealing resin. Gen Dent. 2000. 48:78–80.

23. Suh BI. A new resin technology: a glaze/composite sealant that cures without forming an oxygen-inhibited layer. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2003. 24(8):27–29.

24. Barghi N, Alexander C. A new surface sealant for polishing composit resin restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2003. 24(8):30–33.

25. Ramos RP, Chimello DT, Chinelatti MA, Dibb RGP, Mondelli J. Effect of three surface sealants on marginal sealing of class V composit resin restorations. Oper Dent. 2000. 25:448–453.

26. Crim GA. Effect of composite resin on the microleakge of Scotchbond 2 Gluma. Am J Dent. 1988. 1:215–216.

27. Davidson CL, de Gee AL. Relaxation of polymerization contraction stresses by flow in dental composites. J Dent Res. 1984. 63:146–148.

28. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Marginal integrity to bond strength and strain capacity of composite resin restorative systems. J Prosthet Dent. 1990. 64:658–664.

TOOLS

Similar articles