[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aims& Scopes
Journal News
Articles archive::
All Issues
Current Issue
Browse by Authors
Browse by Keywords
For Authors::
Call for Papers
Submission Instruction
Submission Form
For Reviewers::
Reviewers Section
Registration::
Registration Information
Registration Form
Contact us::
Contact Information
Contact us
Site Facilities::
Site map
Search contents
FAQ
Top 10 contents
Inform to friends
Indexing & Abstracting::
::
(CC-BY 4.0)

AWT IMAGE

Journal of Research in Dental Sciences is licensed under a "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)"
..
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Volume 20, Issue 3 (jrds 2023) ::
J Res Dent Sci 2023, 20(3): 114-121 Back to browse issues page
Microleakage of class-v composite restorations with three types of bonding Futurabond NR, Solo Bond M, Futurabond DC
Shabnam Shahtaghi , Saeid Namati anaraki , Maryam Rahimikhoob *
dental faculty of Tehran Azad uiversity , maryam.rahimikhoob@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (1381 Views)
Background & Aim: Microleakage is one of the most common problems in bonding systems. The ingress of micro-organisms and oral fluids through microscopic spaces between restoration and tooth structure is known as microleakage. The aim of this research was to compare the Microleakage of three types of bondings in CLV composite cavities.
Material and Methods: In this experimental study, CLV cavities were prepared in 2*3*2 mm on the buccal surfaces of 45 premolars, with the occlusal margin on enamel and gingival margin on cementum 1 mm below CEJ. The teeth were divided into 3 groups of 15 each. The cavities were treated by Futurabond DC, Solo Bond M, and Futurabond NR (Voco, Germany). Grandio composite (Voco, Germany) was used to restore the cavities. After thermocycling, the samples were immersed in silver nitrate for 24 h and then in developer solution for 6 h. samples evaluated under a stereomicroscope after buccolingual sectioning. Kruskal Wallis test was used for statistical analysis.
Results: This study revealed that in the gingival area, Solo Bond M had type 1 microleakage in 80% of the cases (dye penetration up to 1/3 of the cavity wall) and type 2 microleakage in 20% (dye penetration up to 2/3 of the cavity wall). Futurabond DC bond had no microleakage in 6.7% of the cases, type 1 in 66.7%, and type 2 in 26.7% of the cases. Futurabond NR bonding had no microleakage in 6.7%, type 1 in 33.3%, and type 3 in 60% of cases (dye penetration in all cavity walls without axial wall involvement ). There was no statistically significant difference in the microleakage at the occlusal margins between 3 groups (P=0/071)
Conclusion: the amount of microleakage in the occlusal area of the cavity is not significantly different in any of the 3 groups, but The amount of microleakage in the gingival area has a significant difference so that the amount of microleakage of Futurabond NR is significantly higher than the two groups of Futurabond DC and Solo Bond M.

 
Article number: 5
Keywords: adhesives, dental leakage, futurabond NR, composite resins
Full-Text [PDF 766 kb]   (1019 Downloads)    
Type of Study: original article | Subject: restorative dentistry
References
1. Pouyanfar H, Tabaii ES, Aghazadeh S, Nobari SP, Imani MM. Micro tensile bond strength of composite to enamel using universal adhesive with/without acid etching compared to etch and rinse and self-etch bonding agents. Open Access Maced. J. Med. Sci. 2018 ;6(11):2186. [DOI:10.3889/oamjms.2018.427] [PMID] [PMCID]
2. Lopes GC, Cardoso PC, Vieira LC, Baratieri LN, Rampinelli K, Costa G. Shear bond strength of acetone-based one-bottle adhesive systems. Braz. Dent. J. 2006; 17:39-43. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-64402006000100009] [PMID]
3. Nemati Anaraki S, Anamzade A. Comparison microleakage of Solo Bond plus, Solo Bond M & Futura Bond DC in Cl V composite restoration [dissertation]. Islamic Azad University, Tehran Dental Branch, 2013.
4. Ferrari M, Goracci G, Garcia-Godoy F. Bonding mechanism of three "one-bottle" systems to conditioned and unconditioned enamel and dentin. Am. J. Dent.1997;10(5):224-30.
5. Shaikh S, Pakolu S, Vernekar A, Parkarwar P, Kharadi U, Khairnar S. A review on a connecting link-dentin bonding agents. World J. Pharm. Res. 2020;9(7):550-62.
6. Sánchez-Ayala A, Farias-Neto A, Vilanova LS, Gomes JC, Gomes OM. Marginal microleakage of class V resin-based composite restorations bonded with six one-step self-etch systems. Braz. Oral Res. 2013;27:225-30. [DOI:10.1590/S1806-83242013000300003] [PMID]
7. Heymann HO, Edward S and V.Ritter A. Art & Science of Operative Dentistry. 7th. Elsevier. P: 118, 122-3.
8. Cardoso PE, Placido E, Francci CE, Perdigão J. Microleakage of Class V resin-based composite restorations using five simplified adhesive systems. Am. J. Dent. 1999;12(6):291-4.
9. Poggio C, Chiesa M, Dagna A, Colombo M, Scribante A. Microleakage in class V gingiva-shaded composite resin restorations. Annali di stomatologia. 2012;3(1):19.
10. Yazici AR, Celik C, Dayangac B, Ozgunaltay G. Effects of different light curing units/modes on the microleakage of flowable composite resins. Eur. J. Dent. 2008;2(04):240-6. [DOI:10.1055/s-0039-1697387] [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Küçükeşmen Ç, Sönmez H. Microleakage of class-v composite restorations with different bonding systems on fluorosed teeth. Eur. J. Dent. 2008;2(01):48-58. [DOI:10.1055/s-0039-1697354] [PMID] [PMCID]
12. ØILO G, JØRGENSEN KD. Effect of beveling on the occurrence of fractures in the enamel surrounding composite resin fillings. J. Oral Rehabil. 1977;4(4):305-9. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2842.1977.tb00996.x] [PMID]
13. Vinay S, Shivanna V. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of fifth, sixth, and seventh generation dentin bonding agents: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent. 2010;13(3):136. [DOI:10.4103/0972-0707.71645] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. S.Nemati Anaraki & H. Yousefi Fakhr, " Comparison microleakage of three different dentine bonding agent Clearfil SE Bond , Opti Bond Solo plus and G Bond in Class V composite restorations" 1385-86 ; doctorate Thesis: 12024
15. Arias VG, Campos IT, Pimenta LA. Microleakage study of three adhesive systems. Brazilian dental journal. 2004;15:194-8. [DOI:10.1590/S0103-64402004000300006] [PMID]
16. Geerts S, Bolette A, Seidel L, Guéders A. An in vitro evaluation of leakage of two etch and rinse and two self-etch adhesives after thermocycling. International journal of dentistry. 2012 May 22;2012. [DOI:10.1155/2012/852841] [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Ateyah NZ, Elhejazi AA. Shear bond strengths and microleakage of four types of dentin adhesive materials. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2004 Feb 15;5(1):63-73. [DOI:10.5005/jcdp-5-1-63] [PMID]
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
shahtaghi S, namati anaraki S, rahimikhoob M. Microleakage of class-v composite restorations with three types of bonding Futurabond NR, Solo Bond M, Futurabond DC. J Res Dent Sci 2023; 20 (3) : 5
URL: http://jrds.ir/article-1-1380-en.html
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 20, Issue 3 (jrds 2023) Back to browse issues page
مجله تحقیق در علوم دندانپزشکی Res Dent Sci
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 36 queries by YEKTAWEB 4722