title: Microleakage of class V cavities with different adhesive systems prepared by a diamond instrument and different parameters of Er:YAG laser irradiation.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to evaluate the microleakage of composite resin restorations using two different dentine adhesive systems prepared with a diamond instrument and different parameters of Er:YAG laser irradiation.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Information on this topic with regard to preparing class V cavities with different parameters of Er:YAG laser irradiation and adhesive systems is scarce.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two hundred class V cavities were assigned to ten groups (n = 20 each): group 1: Er:YAG laser (5 Hz, 600 mJ) + phosphoric acid (PA) + Adper Single Bond 2 (ASB2); group 2: Er:YAG laser (10 Hz, 300 mJ) + PA + ASB2; group 3: Er:YAG laser (15 Hz, 200 mJ) + PA + ASB2; group 4: Er:YAG laser (20 Hz, 150 mJ) + PA + ASB2; group 5: diamond instrument + PA + ASB2; group 6: Er:YAG laser (5 Hz, 600 mJ) + Adper Prompt L-Pop (APLP); group 7: Er:YAG laser (10 Hz, 300 mJ) + APLP; group 8: Er:YAG laser (15 Hz, 200 mJ) + APLP; group 9: Er:YAG laser (20 Hz, 150 mJ) + APLP; and group 10: diamond instrument + APLP. Cavities were restored with a nanofill composite (Filtek Supreme XT Body). After thermocycling, the specimens were stained with 0.5% aqueous basic fuchsin dye and sectioned bucco-lingually. Dye penetration was then scored. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests with Bonferroni correction. The Wilcoxon signed ranks test was used to compare occlusal and gingival scores.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Leakage was seen in all groups at both the occlusal and gingival margins. The Kruskal-Wallis test showed statistically significant differences among the 10 groups (p < 0.001). The gingival margins had more microleakage than the occlusal margins (p < 0.001). Pairwise analysis by the Mann-Whitney U test showed that statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in microleakage were found between groups 3 and 5 (3 > 5), 5 and 7 (7 > 5), and 7 and 8 (7 > 8) at the gingival margin, and between groups 3 and 6 (6 > 3), 3 and 7 (7 > 3), 4 and 6 (6 > 4), and 4 and 7 (7 > 4) at the occlusal margin.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  We concluded that for all groups, microleakage values were higher at the gingival margins. The use of the Er:YAG laser for cavity preparation with different parameters and different dentine adhesive systems influenced the marginal sealing of composite resin restorations.
authors.affiliation: Department of Conservative Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Faculty of Dentistry, Ankara, Turkey. nurayattar@hotmail.com
authors.forename: Nuray
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Attar
authors.forename: Yonca
authors.initials: Y
authors.lastname: Korkmaz
authors.forename: Emre
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Ozel
authors.forename: Ceren Ozge
authors.initials: CO
authors.lastname: Bicer
authors.forename: Erhan
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Firatli
mesh_terms: D000134:Acid Etching, Dental; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; D003188:Composite Resins; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods; D003738:Dental Cements; D003763:Dental Leakage; D006801:Humans; D066298:In Vitro Techniques; D053844:Lasers, Solid-State; D010756:Phosphoric Acids
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; D003738:Dental Cements; C474035:Filtek Supreme; D010756:Phosphoric Acids; C115612:single bond; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate; C030242:phosphoric acid