Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
JOURNAL OF ADHESION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, cilt.31, sa.6, ss.677-689, 2017 (SCI-Expanded)
Purpose: To examine microleakage around Class-V restorations bonded with 3 current all-in-one adhesive systems in the presence or absence of surface-sealant in different evaluation groups.Materials and Methods: Clearfil S3 Bond, G-Aenial Bond, and Optibond All-in-One (AiO), were used in the Class-V cavities in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions (control group) or were additionally combined with Fortify Plus surface-sealant (surface-sealant group). The two main treatment groups of the dentin adhesives were subdivided into four different evaluation groups (24h, 6months, 12months, and 12months with two applications); the teeth were immersed in 0.5% methylene blue dye solution for 24h. Samples were then sectioned longitudinally in a bucco-lingual direction and evaluated for microleakage under a stereomicroscope. Dye penetration was scored at the enamel (occlusal) and dentin (gingival) margins.Results: Microleakage scores were greater at the dentin margins compared with the enamel margins for Clearfil S3 Bond in all evaluation groups, whereas no difference was observed between enamel and dentin microleakage for Optibond AiO. Using Fortify Plus in the enamel margins decreased the microleakage scores of Clearfil S3 Bond. When the control and surface-sealant groups were compared in the G-Aenial Bond enamel margins, the application of surface-sealant significantly reduced microleakage after 6 and 12months. For Optibond AiO, no statistically significant differences in enamel and dentin margins were observed between the control and surface-sealant application groups.Conclusion: The application of surface-sealant could be considered appropriate for reducing microleakage in composite resin restorations, but this effect might depend on the dentin adhesive.