title: Comparison of microleakage of composite restorations using fifth and sixth generation dentin bonding agent: an in vivo study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The success of bonded restorations depends on effective bonding between restorative materials and tooth structure, and it prevents microleakage. New dentin bonding systems have been introduced which promotes this concept. The aim of this study was to compare the amount of microleakage between 'single bond' vs 'Prompt L-Pop' during different time periods.
  
  
  METHODS
  In this clinical trial study, 60 nonretentive class five cavities were prepared on buccal surfaces of human premolars which were scheduled to be removed for orthodontic purposes. The cavities were restored using two different bonding agents; fifth generation (Single Bond) and sixth generation (Prompt L-Pop) and then filled with resin composite (Filtek Z-250). The samples in both groups were extracted after placing the restoration in three periods of time: Immediately, 1 week and 6 months postplacement. Specimens were sealed with two layers of nail varnish except for 1 mm around restoration and immersed in a silver nitrate solution for 24 hours. The teeth were then sectioned longitudinally and the degree of microleakage was determined by stereomicroscope based on standard usual criteria.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Single bond showed more leakage at dentin margin than enamel margin in all three extraction periods and differences were significant among three groups (p < 0.05). In samples which were restored with Prompt L-Pop only in groups of 6 months there were significant differences between enamel and dentin margins. At enamel margin there were no significant differences between microleakage of groups according to the passage of time (p > 0.05).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of this study using two different bonding systems, indicate that adhesion to enamel was more valuable than dentin and perhaps systems that include self-etching primers are less sensitive to remaining moisture on dentin and they are less affected during different time periods.
authors.affiliation: Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
authors.forename: Pooran
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Samimi
authors.forename: Mehrdad
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Barekatain
authors.forename: Samaneh
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Alaei
mesh_terms: D000134:Acid Etching, Dental / Q000379:methods; D001641:Bicuspid / Q000473:pathology; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate / Q000737:chemistry; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry*; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation / Q000379:methods; D003743:Dental Enamel / Q000648:ultrastructure; D003763:Dental Leakage / Q000145:classification*; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry*; D003793:Dental Restoration, Permanent / Q000379:methods; D003804:Dentin / Q000648:ultrastructure; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents / Q000737:chemistry*; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D019279:Resin Cements / Q000737:chemistry; D016622:Silver Staining; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D003188:Composite Resins; D003764:Dental Materials; D017220:Dentin-Bonding Agents; C444701:Filtek Z250; C408584:Prompt L-Pop; D019279:Resin Cements; C115612:single bond; D017438:Bisphenol A-Glycidyl Methacrylate