Search

Abstract Background It is still not fully understood what pretreatment is best for achieving maximum tightness for pit and fissure sealings (PFS). Aim This study investigated microleakage of PFS placed after etching with phosphoric acid or after the application of self‐etching primers/adhesives (SEPA). Design 131 third molars were assigned to ten groups. In Hel‐P, Helioseal® was applied after phosphoric acid etching. In the other groups, SEPA were used (Dyr‐AP: Adper™ Prompt™ L‐Pop™, Dyract® Seal; Bea: BeautiSealant Primer and Paste; Hel‐Exp: Experimental primer, Helioseal®; Hel‐Cl: Clearfil™ SE Bond1, Helioseal®). Specimens were stored in distilled water at 37°C (28 days), followed by 3500 thermocycles and staining with 5% methylene blue (M) or 5% silver nitrate (S). After methylene blue staining and sectioning, microleakage was assessed light microscopically. During silver nitrate staining, specimens were dissolved by 32% HCl and remaining PFS were evaluated under a SEM. Results Tightness, percentage of penetrated area, and maximum dye penetration were best for Hel‐P and Hel‐Cl (p

Aim: To compare marginal seal at tooth-material and material-material interfaces in the proximal box in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations. Methods: Mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared in 35 premolars and permanent molars with carbide bur. The distal proximal box was restored with amalgam (Permite, SDI) until reaching the height of pulpal floor. Dental tissues were etched with 37% acid and a bonding agent (Bond 1-SF, Pentron) was applied and cured. Composite resin (Filtek Z250, 3M-ESPE) was placed in layers in the mesial proximal box and occlusally, and light cured. Marginal adaptation was evaluated at the following interfaces: amalgam-tooth (A), amalgam-composite resin (AC) and composite resin-tooth (C). Microleakage was evaluated by means of methylene blue infiltration after 7-day water storage and thermocycling regimen (1500 cycles). Microleakage was assessed as percentage depth of horizontal dye penetration. Results: ANOVA showed statistically significant difference between A-AC and A-C (p0.05). Mean microleakage values were A (73.529/28.71), AC (34.118/34.6) and C (40.435/ 34.965), according to Tukey’s test. Conclusions: Although the bonding mechanism between amalgam and composite has not yet been completely explained, amalgam/composite resin interface exhibited the lowest microleakage scores. Since amalgam/composite resin restorations exhibited lower microleakage scores than composite resin on the cervical surface, combined restorations can be considered as a biological and aesthetic alternative to conventional Class II composite or amalgam restorations.