Estimation of the Gingival microleakage of Two Composite Resins with Three Insertion Techniques for Class V Restorations (In-Vitro Comparative Study)

Abstract

Objective: Evaluating the marginal microleakage of two different composite resins with three different restorative techniques in class V cavities with the cervical margins within the cementoenamel junction. 
 Methods: Sixty standardized box-shaped class V cavities of 2×2×3 mm (depth, length, width) prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 30 freshly extracted healthy human premolars. The teeth randomly divided into two equal groups: group A (FiltekTM Z250 XT) and group B (BeautifilTM II LS giomer). Then each group is subdivided into 3 equal subgroups: group I (bulk technique-10 cavities), group II ( split horizontal technique-10 cavities) and group III (vertical technique-10 cavities) and filled according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The samples were subjected to thermocycling (5°C ±2°C & 55°C ±2°C with a 30 seconds dwell time) and immersed in 2% buffered Methylene blue solution at 37°C for 24 hours. The restorations were sectioned longitudinally in buccolingual direction through the centers of the restoration. Then evaluated for microleakage using a stereomicroscope at 10x magnification and scored as 0, 1, 2, and 3. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used and p value ≤ 0.05 considred statistically significant.
 Results: Split increment horizontal layering technique showed statistically significant lower microleakage than vertical layering and bulk technique. While giomer showed less microleakage than Z250 but statistically not significant.
 Conclusions: The use of split horizontal technique and giomer composite offers better and less marginal microleakage in class V restorations.