Comparative evaluation of microleakage around Class V cavities restored with alkasite restorative material with and without bonding agent and flowable composite resin: An study.

BACKGROUND

Marginal adaptability of restorative material is one of the prime factors for success of a restoration.

AIM

To evaluate microleakage at enamel restoration and dentin restoration interface of Class V cavities restored with new alkasite restorative material Cention-N, with and without using bonding agent and flowable composite resin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty Class V tooth preparations were divided into three groups (n = 10): Group-I restored with Cention-N (Ivoclar Vivadent) without adhesive, Group-II was restored with Cention-N after application of eighth-generation bonding agent (3M ESPE, Single Bond Universal Adhesive), and Group-III was restored with flowable composite resin (Tetric-N-Flow, Ivoclar Vivadent). All samples were subjected to 200 thermocycles between temperature baths at 5°C and 55°C. All samples were cut longitudinally through the center of the restorations with the help of isomet diamond saw. The sections were then observed under binocular stereomicroscope at 20×. Two evaluators scored the depth of dye penetration independently at enamel and dentin margins.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric analysis followed by Dunn's multiple comparison tests were done to evaluate differences among the experimental groups. Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the difference between occlusal and gingival scores within each restoration.

RESULTS

Microleakage seen in decreasing order: Cention-N without adhesive >Flowable composite >Cention-N with adhesive.

CONCLUSION

Microleakage at enamel restoration interface was less than microleakage at dentin restoration interface of each group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Least microleakage was seen with Cention-N with adhesive followed by flowable composite. More microleakage was seen with Cention-N without adhesive.