title: In vitro evaluation of microleakage of indirect composite inlays cemented with four luting agents.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Microleakage around dental restorations is implicated in the occurrence of secondary carious lesions, adverse pulpal response, and reduced restoration longevity.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microleakage of indirect resin composite inlays cemented with 4 luting agents.
  
  
  METHODS
  Standardized Class V inlay preparations overlapping the cemento-enamel junction were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 extracted human mandibular third molars. Eighty postpolymerized, heat-treated resin composite inlays (Targis, 72 specimens, 8 controls) were processed in stone replicas and cemented into the preparations using 4 luting agents (n = 18 + 2 controls for each cement group): a resin composite used with a bonding agent (Variolink II/Excite), a resin composite used with a self-etching primer, but without bonding agent (Panavia F/ED Primer), a modified resin composite used with a bonding agent (Resinomer/One Step), and a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (Fuji Plus). Thirty-six inlays (n = 9 + 1 control) were subjected to thermal cycling (2000 cycles, 5 degrees C/55 degrees C), whereas the other 36 were not. All the teeth were then immersed in 1% methylene blue dye solution for 48 hours. Microleakage score, margin location (enamel/cementum), thermal cycling history, and preparation location (buccal/lingual) were analyzed using a multivariate model (alpha = .05). Multivariate analysis was performed using a polychotomous logistic regression.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The preparation location had no significant effect on dye penetration. The margin location (enamel or cementum) and the thermal cycling had a significant effect on microleakage (odds ratios [ORs] = 17.6 and 8.04, respectively). In comparing the 3 resin-based luting agents (Variolink II, Panavia F, and Resinomer) to Fuji Plus, Panavia F exhibited the lowest significant overall microleakage (OR = 0.09), followed by Variolink II (significant OR equal to 0.43), whereas Resinomer demonstrated the greatest significant overall microleakage (OR = 1.35).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Within the experimental conditions of this in vitro study, thermal cycling significantly increased microleakage (OR = 8.04). The overall microleakage at the enamel margins was significantly lower than the overall microleakage at the cementum margins for the 4 luting agents tested (OR = 17.6).
authors.affiliation: Henri Poincare University and University Hospital, Nancy, France. gerdolled@aol.com
authors.forename: David A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Gerdolle
authors.forename: Eric
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Mortier
authors.forename: Carole
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Loos-Ayav
authors.forename: Bruno
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Jacquot
authors.forename: Marc M
authors.initials: MM
authors.lastname: Panighi
mesh_terms: D000134:Acid Etching, Dental / Q000379:methods; D002484:Cementation / Q000379:methods*; D003188:Composite Resins; D003739:Dental Cementum; D003743:Dental Enamel; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000517:prevention & control; D003799:Dental Stress Analysis; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; D006358:Hot Temperature; D006801:Humans; D007284:Inlays; D016015:Logistic Models; D008963:Molar; D019279:Resin Cements; D012823:Silicate Cement
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; C113301:FujiPlus; D005899:Glass Ionomer Cements; C438843:Panavia-Fluoro; D019279:Resin Cements; C111282:dental polyglass; C110709:resinomer; D012823:Silicate Cement; C103502:Variolink