Authors : Anil Kumar S., Varun Krishnan V.P., Jyothi K.N., Venugopal .P, Sharath Kumar .P, Girish S.A., Melwin
DOI : 10.18231/2278-3784.2018.0002
Volume : 6
Issue : 1
Year : 0
Page No : 7-12
Aim and Objective: Was to assess and compare the microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composites in class V cavities along the occlusal and gingival margins using dye penetration test under stereomicroscope.
Materials and Methods: Seventy five human extracted premolars were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=25), as per the restorative materials for microleakage test. Group I: Tetric Evo Ceram (Bulk fill non flowable). Group II: G-aenial Universal Flo (Highly filled flowable resin composite). Group III: Smart Dentin Replacement (Bulk fill flowable resin composite). Class V (box) cavities were prepared both on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each of the 75 teeth, a total of 150 cavities, restored, immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and then sectioned bucco lingually into two halves. Dye penetration score was measured along occlusal and gingival wall using a Stereomicroscope at 40X magnification. Statistical analysis was done using Chi square test for microleakage assessment. P value was set at Ë‚0.05.
Result: Intergroup comparison showed statistically no significant difference between the three groups both occlusal and gingival wall, whereas groupwise comparison showed statistically significant result between group I and Group II at gingival wall with P value 0.021.
Conclusion: None of three resin composite materials were free from microleakage. All the three materials showed more microleakage at gingival wall compared to occlusal wall. Among all the tested groups G-aenial Universal Flo showed the least microleakage at the gingival wall.
Keyword: Microleakage, Class V, Resin composites.