Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Flowable Composite Resin Using Etch and Rinse, Self-Etch Adhesive Systems, and Self-Adhesive Flowable Composite Resin in Class V Cavities: Confocal Laser Microscopic Study

Abstract

The essential factor in determining the preservation of restoration is the marginal seal. Restoring cervical lesions with a resin composite has always been a challenge. Composite resins with various viscosities and different bonding systems are being researched to reduce the microleakage. Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) is the latest non-destructive technique for visualizing the microleakage. Objectives: To evaluate and compare the microleakage of Universal Flo composite resin (G-aenial) using etch and rinse adhesive system ER-2 steps (Adper Single Bond 2), self-etch adhesive system SE-1 step (G-Bond), and self-adhesive flowable composite resin (Constic) in Class V cavities using a confocal laser scanning microscope. Materials and Method: Class V cavities were prepared on 27 caries-free human extracted premolar teeth on the buccal and lingual surfaces with standardized dimensions of 2 mm height, width 4 mm, and a depth of 2 mm. After the cavity preparation, all teeth were randomly divided into three groups, namely Group-I: G-aenial Universal Flo with Single Bond 2 (n = 9 teeth); Group-II: G- aenial Universal Flo with G-Bond (n = 9 teeth), and Group-III: Constic (n = 9 teeth). The prepared and restored specimens were then subjected to thermocycling for 500 cycles in a water bath at 5 °C and 55 °C with a dwelling time of 30 s. The specimens were placed in 0.6% aqueous rhodamine dye for 48 h. Sectioning was carried out bucco-lingually and specimens were evaluated for microleakage under a confocal laser scanning microscope. Results: There was a significant difference (p = 0.009) in microleakage when comparing total etch and rinse, specifically between Adper Single Bond 2 ER-2 steps (fifth generation) and self-adhesive flowable composite resin, which is Constic. There was more microleakage in the self-etch bonding agent, particularly G-Bond, SE-1 step (seventh generation), when compared to ER-2 steps (fifth generation bonding agent); however, the results were not statistically significant (p = 0.468). The self-adhesive flowable composite resin showed more microleakage than SE-1 step and ER-2 steps. Conclusions: None of the adhesive systems tested were free from microleakage. However, less microleakage was observed in the total etch and rinse, especially Adper Single Bond 2 (ER-2 steps), than the self-etch adhesive system SE-1 step and self-adhesive flowable composite resin. Clinical significance: Constant research and technological advancements are taking place in dentin adhesives to improve the marginal seal. This has led to the evolution of total acid-etching dentin bonding agents termed as etch and rinse (ER)-2 steps (fifth generation dentin bonding agents) and self-etching (SE) 2 steps, and SE-1 step dentin bonding agents termed as the sixth and seventh generation bonding agents, respectively.