Evaluation of Enamel and Dentinal Microleakage in Class II Silorane-Based and Methacrylate-Based Resin Composite Restorations Using Specific and Nonspecific Adhesives

Overview

Journal J Dent (Tehran)

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2018 Nov 9

PMID 30405733

Authors

Sayed Mostafa Mousavinasab

Maede Ghasemi

Mitra Yadollahi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate enamel and dentinal microleakage in Class II cavities restored with silorane- and methacrylate-based resin composites using specific and nonspecific adhesives.

Materials And Methods: Thirty-six caries-free human premolars were used. Two Class II cavities were prepared on each tooth. The gingival floor was set at 1 mm above (on the mesial surface) and at 1 mm below (on the distal surface) the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). The samples were randomly divided into four groups, and the cavities were restored with a methacrylate-based composite (Filtek P60) and a silorane-based composite (Filtek P90) with specific and nonspecific adhesives. Microleakage was tested using a standardized dye penetration method. All samples were examined under a stereomicroscope, and microleakage scores were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney-U tests. One sample from each group was examined under a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to determine the bonding area.

Results: No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the enamel microleakage (P=0.086). There was a significant difference between the groups with regard to dentinal microleakage (P=0.003). No significant reduction in microleakage was observed in groups restored with Filtek P90 composite using its specific adhesive compared to those restored with Filtek P60 composite using its specific adhesive (P=0.626).

Conclusions: The results indicated that the application of methacrylate- and silorane-based composites with specific or nonspecific adhesives had no impact on enamel microleakage, but it affected dentinal microleakage, and specific adhesives showed less microleakage. It seems that a phosphate-methacrylate-based intermediate resin is required to bond dimethacrylate adhesive to silorane-based composites.

References

David Eick J, Smith R, Pinzino C, Kostoryz E . Stability of silorane dental monomers in aqueous systems. J Dent. 2005; 34(6):405-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2005.09.004. View

Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R . Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater. 2005; 21(1):68-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.10.007. View

de Munck J, van Landuyt K, Coutinho E, Poitevin A, Peumans M, Lambrechts P . Micro-tensile bond strength of adhesives bonded to Class-I cavity-bottom dentin after thermo-cycling. Dent Mater. 2005; 21(11):999-1007. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2004.11.005. View

Hamano N, Ino S, Fukuyama T, Hickel R, Kunzelmann K . Repair of silorane-based composites: microtensile bond strength of silorane-based composites repaired with methacrylate-based composites. Dent Mater J. 2013; 32(5):695-701. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2013-129. View

Akimoto N, Takamizu M, Momoi Y . 10-year clinical evaluation of a self-etching adhesive system. Oper Dent. 2007; 32(1):3-10. DOI: 10.2341/06-46. View

Dauvillier B, Feilzer A . Low-shrinkage dental restorative composite: modeling viscoelastic behavior during setting. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2005; 73(1):129-39. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.b.30190. View

Samimi P, Alizadeh V, Fathpour K, Mazaheri H, Mortazavi V . In-vitro comparison of the effect of different bonding strategies on the micro-shear bond strength of a silorane-based composite resin to dentin. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2016; 13(2):124-31. PMC: 4810909. DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.178197. View

Schmidt M, Kirkevang L, Horsted-Bindslev P, Poulsen S . Marginal adaptation of a low-shrinkage silorane-based composite: 1-year randomized clinical trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2010; 15(2):291-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-010-0446-2. View

de Munck J, Vargas M, Iracki J, Van Landuyt K, Poitevin A, Lambrechts P . One-day bonding effectiveness of new self-etch adhesives to bur-cut enamel and dentin. Oper Dent. 2005; 30(1):39-49. View

10.

Chen M . Update on dental nanocomposites. J Dent Res. 2010; 89(6):549-60. DOI: 10.1177/0022034510363765. View

11.

Versluis A, Tantbirojn D, Pintado M, DeLong R, Douglas W . Residual shrinkage stress distributions in molars after composite restoration. Dent Mater. 2004; 20(6):554-64. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2003.05.007. View

12.

Kramer N, Lohbauer U, Garcia-Godoy F, Frankenberger R . Light curing of resin-based composites in the LED era. Am J Dent. 2008; 21(3):135-42. View

13.

Nikolaenko S, Lohbauer U, Roggendorf M, Petschelt A, Dasch W, Frankenberger R . Influence of c-factor and layering technique on microtensile bond strength to dentin. Dent Mater. 2004; 20(6):579-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2003.08.001. View

14.

Navarra C, Cadenaro M, Armstrong S, Jessop J, Antoniolli F, Sergo V . Degree of conversion of Filtek Silorane Adhesive System and Clearfil SE Bond within the hybrid and adhesive layer: an in situ Raman analysis. Dent Mater. 2009; 25(9):1178-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.05.009. View

15.

Tezvergil-Mutluay A, Lassila L, Vallittu P . Incremental layers bonding of silorane composite: the initial bonding properties. J Dent. 2008; 36(7):560-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2008.03.008. View

16.

Gao B, Lin H, Han J, Zheng G . Polymerization characteristics, flexural modulus and microleakage evaluation of silorane-based and methacrylate-based composites. Am J Dent. 2011; 24(2):97-102. View

17.

DAlpino P, Farias N, Silva M, Goes M, Gonzalez A, Di Hipolito V . Compatibility between silorane adhesive and simplified methacrylate-based adhesive systems. Dent Mater J. 2013; 32(2):263-73. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2012-245. View

18.

Umer F, Naz F, Khan F . An in vitro evaluation of microleakage in class V preparations restored with Hybrid versus Silorane composites. J Conserv Dent. 2011; 14(2):103-7. PMC: 3146097. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.82600. View

19.

Hegde M, Hegde P, Chandra C . Morphological evaluation of new total etching and self etching adhesive system interfaces with dentin. J Conserv Dent. 2012; 15(2):151-5. PMC: 3339010. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.94589. View

20.

Shafiei F, Akbarian S . Microleakage of nanofilled resin-modified glass-ionomer/silorane- or methacrylate-based composite sandwich Class II restoration: effect of simultaneous bonding. Oper Dent. 2013; 39(1):E22-30. DOI: 10.2341/13-020-L. View