Microleakage in conservative cavities varying the preparation method and surface treatment

Objective

To assess microleakage in conservative class V cavities prepared with aluminum-oxide air abrasion or turbine and restored with self-etching or etch-and-rinse adhesive systems.

Material and Methods

Forty premolars were randomly assigned to 4 groups (I and II: air abrasion; III and IV: turbine) and class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces. Conditioning approaches were: groups I/III - 37% phosphoric acid; groups II/IV -self-priming etchant (Tyrian-SPe). Cavities were restored with One Step Plus/Filtek Z250. After finishing, specimens were thermocycled, immersed in 50% silver nitrate, and serially sectioned. Microleakage at the occlusal and cervical interfaces was measured in mm and calculated by a software. Data were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05).

Results

Forty premolars were randomly assigned to 4 groups (I and II: air abrasion; III and IV: turbine) and class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces. Conditioning approaches were: groups I/III - 37% phosphoric acid; groups II/IV -self-priming etchant (Tyrian-SPe). Cavities were restored with One Step Plus/Filtek Z250. After finishing, specimens were thermocycled, immersed in 50% silver nitrate, and serially sectioned. Microleakage at the occlusal and cervical interfaces was measured in mm and calculated by a software. Data were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey’s test (α=0.05).

Conclusion

Marginal seal of cavities prepared with aluminum-oxide air abrasion was different from that of conventionally prepared cavities, and the etch-and-rinse system promoted higher marginal seal at both enamel and dentin margins.