Effect of surface sealants on marginal microleakage in Class V resin composite restorations.
OBJECTIVE
Surface sealants may reduce or avoid problems related to the marginal interface. The aim of this study was to evaluate the microleakage in resin composite Class V restorations sealed with an adhesive system (Xeno III [Dentsply, Konstanz, Germany]), a sealant for exposed dentin (Seal & Protect [Dentsply]), and two surface sealants (Fortify [Bisco, Lombard, IL, USA]; Optiguard [Kerr, Orange, CA, USA]).


METHODS
Fifty cavities with margins in enamel were prepared on crowns of bovine teeth and restored with an adhesive system (Prime and Bond NT/Dentsply) and resin composite (Esthet X/Dentsply). They were separated into four groups for the application of the surface sealants, and a control group (without surface sealing). Thermal cycling with baths of 5 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C and 55 degrees C +/- 2 degrees C were performed in 600 cycles. The teeth were made impermeable, except for a 3-mm window around the restoration and immersed in a 50% silver nitrate solution for 8 hours. The crown was sectioned longitudinally and the cuts were analyzed by three independent evaluators, using a stereoscopic loupe with 10x magnification that attributed representative scores. Agreement among the examiners was evaluated by the Kappa test.


RESULTS
The Kruskal-Wallis test and Dunn Method showed that there was significant difference between the Control and Seal & Protect groups. The Seal & Protect group presented the lowest degree of microleakage, followed by the Optiguard and Xeno III groups. The highest scores were obtained in the Control group.


CONCLUSIONS
The sealant materials evaluated presented different rates of effectiveness, and Seal & Protect was the most effective in decreasing the degree of marginal microleakage. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE Although surface sealants or covering agents have been used to diminish microleakage, they may present different rates of effectiveness with regard to reducing the degree of marginal leakage. (J Esthet Restor Dent 21:397-406, 2009).
Silva Santana
Soraia Veloso
SV
Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry and Research Center São Leopoldo Mandic Research Centre, Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Bombana
Antonio Carlos
AC
Flório
Flávia Martão
FM
Basting
Roberta Tarkany
RT
D000818:Animals; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate / Q000737:chemistry; D002417:Cattle; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D001840:Dental Bonding; D003743:Dental Enamel / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000145:classification*; D018772:Dental Marginal Adaptation; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000145:classification*; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry*; D008314:Malonates / Q000737:chemistry; D011092:Polyethylene Glycols / Q000737:chemistry; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids / Q000737:chemistry; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry*; D016622:Silver Staining; D013499:Surface Properties; D013696:Temperature; D013997:Time Factors; D014867:Water / Q000737:chemistry
D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C466112:Esthet-X; C095811:Fortify sealant; D008314:Malonates; D011109:Polymethacrylic Acids; C425843:Prime and Bond NT; D019279:Resin Cements; C442646:Seal and Protect resin cement; C487957:Xeno III; D014867:Water; C030979:diethyl acetamidomalonic acid; C020946:triethylene glycol dimethacrylate; D011092:Polyethylene Glycols; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate