RESUMO
PURPOSE: This study compared microleakage of different resin based composite (RBC) materials bonded to dentin, after chlorhexidine (CHX) application, by different adhesion protocols of a universal adhesive system. METHODS: Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 40 premolar teeth. The "etch-and-rinse" technique of a universal bond adhesive system (Single Bond Universal Adhesive) was used on buccal preparations, while the "self-etch" protocol was used on the lingual surfaces. Two RBCs, one bulk fill (Filtek Bulk Fill [FBF]) and one conventional (Filtek Z350 XT [Z350XT]), were used. Teeth were divided into two groups of 20 teeth each, 10 per each RBC (n = 10): (1) control; and (2) pretreatment with 2% CHX. For FBF groups, teeth were restored with a single increment; however, for Z350XT, a layering technique was used. Teeth were aged by thermo-cycling and prepared for microleakage testing. Dye penetration was evaluated and scored from 0 to 4. Data were analyzed at a significance level of P < 0.05. RESULTS: The highest microleakage mean scores were found in the control group of the etched margins for both RBCs (2.80 ± 1.033 FBF and 2.10 ± 1.370 Z350XT). The CHX-pretreated group showed significantly lower microleakage than the control for FBF only (P = 0.008). No significant difference was found between groups for the "self-etch" protocol (χ2 = 0.884, P = 0.08). No significant differences were found between FBF and Z350XT in all study groups (P > 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: When the "self-etch" protocol of the universal adhesive system was used, dentin microleakage was not affected by CHX-pretreatment when teeth were restored with bulk fill or conventional RBCs. In the "etch-and-rinse" protocol, CHX application improved the marginal seal before restoration with bulk fill material. However, in the absence of CHX, the "etch-and-rinse" protocol negatively affected marginal integrity.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This in-vitro study aimed to investigate the effect of two different antibacterial disinfectants on the microleakage performance of newly developed bulk-fill composite, bonded to different tooth structures. METHODS: Class V cavities were prepared in 30 sound premolar teeth, with enamel occlusal margins (OM) and dentin cervical margins (CM). Two disinfectants, 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX) and Listerine Miswak (ListM), were used. Teeth were divided into three groups (n = 10): G1, Control; G2, CHX; and G3, ListM. Disinfectants were applied to the cavity preparation walls after they were etched with 35% phosphoric acid. The Single Bond Universal adhesive system was then used, and teeth were restored with Filtek One Bulk Fill composite. Samples were examined, after thermocycling aging, by stereomicroscopy for the evaluation of marginal dye penetration. RESULTS: The highest mean microleakage score was reported in the CM of G1 (2.60 ± 1.174), which was significant compared with that of G2 only (p = 0.02). OM in G1 showed no microleakage, with no significant differences found among groups (χ2 = 1.39, p = 0.50). No significant differences were reported between G2 and G3 (p = 0.45 OM; p = 0.17 CM). CONCLUSIONS: Cavity pretreatment with CHX is not significantly different to pretreatment with CHX. In contrast, CHX improved the cervical marginal seal as compare to the control group (G1).
