Assessing microleakage of different class V restorations after Er:YAG laser and bur preparation.

Abstract

This study assessed in vitro marginal leakage of class V cavities prepared by turbine and Er:YAG laser and restored with different materials. Sixty cavities with enamel and dentine margins were prepared and assigned to six groups: I, II, III by turbine and IV, V, VI by Er:YAG laser. The following restorative systems were used: groups I and IV: Bond 1 + Alert; II and V: Fuji II LC; III and VI: SBMP + Dispersalloy. After finishing, specimens were thermocycled for 8 h and 45 min (500 cycles), isolated, immersed in a 0.2% Rhodamine B solution, sectioned oro-facially and analysed for leakage. The dye penetration means (%) were: occlusal I: 10.09 (+/- 21.28), II: 3.25 (+/- 10.27), III: 0, IV: 41.77 (+/- 42.48), V: 23.37 (+/- 33.79), VI: 12.66 (+/- 24.06); cervical I: 16.49 (+/- 26.67), II: 4.34 (+/- 13.71), III: 0, IV: 37.71 (+/- 30.47), V: 39.56 (+/- 43.35) and VI: 72.53 (+/- 37.79). The use of Er:YAG laser for cavity preparation yielded higher degree of marginal leakage, as compared with the use of conventional air-turbine. The enamel interface provided better marginal sealing, comparing with dentine/cementum margin. As to the cavity preparation device (i.e. laser or bur), the analysis of the results showed that bonded amalgam and Fuji II LC provided less infiltration, than Alert. On the other hand, for lased cavities, Alert provided the best results, similar to those of Fuji II LC and superior to those reached by bonded amalgam.