Microleakage of an Enhanced Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer Restorative Material in Primary Molars
Objectives: Resin composites, glass ionomers (GIs), or a combination of these materials have gradually replaced silver amalgam in pediatric dentistry. The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of Class II (box only) cavity restorations with ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass, resin-modified GI (RMGI), and composite in primary molars.
Materials and Methods: A total of 65 primary molars with at least one intact proximal surface were selected in this in-vitro study. After debridement of each tooth, Class II (box only) cavities were prepared. Based on the type of the restorative material and the application of etching and bonding adhesives, the samples were categorized into five groups: (1) composite; (2) RMGI (Fuji II LC)+conditioner; (3) RMGI (Fuji II LC); (4) enhanced RMGI (ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass)+etching/bonding; and (5) ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative Glass. The restored teeth were thermocycled for 2000 cycles. After embedding in an acrylic resin, the degree of dye penetration at axial and gingival walls was assessed using a stereomicroscope. The data were statistically analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s test.
Results: Resin-based composite (RBC) Z250 showed the least microleakage, while RMGI showed maximum microleakage at axial walls. The mean degree of microleakage at gingival margins was the lowest in RBC Z250 and ACTIVA+etching/bonding groups and the highest in RMGI+conditioner and RMGI groups.
Conclusions: The microleakage of ACTIVA Bioactive Restorative material in the absence or presence of etching and bonding could be comparable to the microleakage of composites
- Qvist V, Manscher E, Teglers PT. Resin-modified and conventional glass ionomer restorations in primary teeth: 8-year results. J Dent. 2004 May;32(4):285-94.
- Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials--fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater. 2007 Mar;23(3):343-62.
- Abd El Halim S, Zaki D. Comparative evaluation of microleakage among three different glass ionomer types. Oper Dent. 2011 Jan-Feb;36(1):36-42.
- Delmé KI, Deman PJ, De Bruyne MA, De Moor RJ. Microleakage of four different restorative glass ionomer formulations in class V cavities: Er:YAG laser versus conventional preparation. Photomed Laser Surg. 2008 Dec;26(6):541-9.
- Ilie N, Hickel R, Valceanu AS, Huth KC. Fracture toughness of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Apr;16(2):489-98.
- Alrahlah A. Diametral Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength, and Surface Microhardness of Bioactive Bulk Fill Restorative. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2018 Jan 1;19(1):13-19.
- PULPDENT®. Dental Innovation Since 1947. Products - ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE-RESTORATIVE™ - Product Review: BioACTIVE Products for ProACTIVE Dentistry. Available at: https://www.pulpdent.com/shop/category/activa-bioactive-restorative/ Accessed May 14, 2018.
- Bansal R, Burgess J, Lawson NC. Wear of an enhanced resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative material. Am J Dent. 2016 Jun;29(3):171-4.
- Pameijer CH, Garcia-Godoy F, Morrow BR, Jefferies SR. Flexural strength and flexural fatigue properties of resin-modified glass ionomers. J Clin Dent. 2015;26(1):23-7.
- Croll TP, Berg JH, Donly KJ. Dental repair material: a resin-modified glass-ionomer bioactive ionic resin-based composite. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015 Jan;36(1):60-5.
- Zmener O, Pameijer CH, Hernández S. Resistance against bacterial leakage of four luting agents used for cementation of complete cast crowns. Am J Dent. 2014 Feb;27(1):51-5.
- Shruthi AS, Nagaveni NB, Poornima P, Selvamani M, Madhushankari GS, Subba Reddy VV. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of conventional and modifications of glass ionomer cement in primary teeth: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2015 Oct-Dec;33(4):279-84.
- Mosharrafian S, Heidari A, Rahbar P. Microleakage of Two Bulk Fill and One Conventional Composite in Class II Restorations of Primary Posterior Teeth. J Dent (Tehran). 2017 May;14(3):123-31.
- Cehreli SB, Tirali RE, Yalcinkaya Z, Cehreli ZC. Microleakage of newly developed glass carbomer cement in primary teeth. Eur J Dent. 2013 Jan;7(1):15-21.
- Gopinath VK. Comparative evaluation of microleakage between bulk esthetic materials versus resin-modified glass ionomer to restore Class II cavities in primary molars. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2017 Jul;35(3):238-43.
- Gaintantzopoulou MD, Gopinath VK, Zinelis S. Evaluation of cavity wall adaptation of bulk esthetic materials to restore class II cavities in primary molars. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 May;21(4):1063-1070.
- Nelsen RJ, Paffenbarger GC, Wolcott RB. Fluid exchange at the margins of dental restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 1952 Mar;44(3):288-95.
- Shih WY. Microleakage in different primary tooth restorations. J Chin Med Assoc. 2016 Apr;79(4):228-34.
- Diwanji A, Dhar V, Arora R, Madhusudan A, Rathore AS. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of three restorative glass ionomer cements: An in vitro study. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2014 Jul;5(2):373-7.
- França FM, Aguiar FH, dos Santos AJ, Lovadino JR. Quantitative evaluation of microleakage in class V cavities using one-bottle and self-etching adhesive systems. Braz Oral Res. 2004 Jul-Sep;18(3):253-9.
- Celik C, Cehreli SB, Arhun N. Resin composite repair: Quantitative microleakage evaluation of resin-resin and resin-tooth interfaces with different surface treatments. Eur J Dent. 2015 Jan-Mar;9(1):92-9.
- Siddiqui F, Karkare S. Sealing Ability of Nano-ionomer in Primary Teeth: An ex vivo Study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016 Jul-Sep;9(3):209-13.
- Gerdolle DA, Mortier E, Droz D. Microleakage and polymerization shrinkage of various polymer restorative materials. J Dent Child (Chic). 2008 May-Aug;75(2):125-33.
- Hussein TA, Bakar WZ, Ghani ZA, Mohamad D. The assessment of surface roughness and microleakage of eroded tooth-colored dental restorative materials. J Conserv Dent. 2014 Nov;17(6):531-5.
- Eronat N, Yilmaz E, Kara N, Topaloglu AA. Comparative evaluation of microleakage of nano-filled resin-modified glass ionomer: An in vitro study. Eur J Dent. 2014 Oct;8(4):450-5.
- Pontes DG, Guedes-Neto MV, Cabral MF, Cohen-Carneiro F. Microleakage evaluation of class V restorations with conventional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements. Oral Health Dent Manag. 2014 Sep;13(3):642-6.
- Brown WS, Jacobs HR, Thompson RE. Thermal fatigue in teeth. J Dent Res. 1972 Mar-Apr;51(2):461-7.
- PULPDENT®. Dental Innovation Since 1947. Products - ACTIVA™ Overview - Product Review. Available at: https://www.pulpdent.com/shop/category/a/?insructionsforuse#bioactiveprop/ Accessed May 14, 2018.
- Mitra SB, Lee CY, Bui HT, Tantbirojn D, Rusin RP. Long-term adhesion and mechanism of bonding of a paste-liquid resin-modified glass-ionomer. Dent Mater. 2009 Apr;25(4):459-66.
- Singla T, Pandit IK, Srivastava N, Gugnani N, Gupta M. An evaluation of microleakage of various glass ionomer based restorative materials in deciduous and permanent teeth: An in vitro study. Saudi Dent J. 2012 Jan;24(1):35-42.
- Nematollahi H, Bagherian A, Ghazvini K, Esmaily H, Mehr MA. Microbial microleakage assessment of class V cavities restored with different materials and techniques: A laboratory study. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2017 Sep-Oct;14(5):344-350.
- Khoroushi M, Karvandi TM, Kamali B, Mazaheri H. Marginal microleakage of resin-modified glass-ionomer and composite resin restorations: effect of using etch-and-rinse and self-etch adhesives. Indian J Dent Res. 2012 May-Jun;23(3):378-83.
- Rekha CV, Varma B, Jayanthi. Comparative evaluation of tensile bond strength and microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement and compomer: An in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2012 Jul;3(3):282-7.
- Alkhudhairy FI, Ahmad ZH. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Various Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016 Dec 1;17(12):997-1002.