Comparison of two-surface and multiple-surface scoring methodologies for in vitro microleakage studies

Area of Science:

• Dental Materials Science
• Restorative Dentistry

Background:

• Microleakage is a critical factor in the longevity of dental restorations.
• Standardized scoring methodologies for microleakage in sectional studies are debated.
• Two-surface versus multiple-surface scoring presents potential differences in evaluating restoration integrity.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare microleakage scores using two-surface and multiple-surface scoring methods.
• To evaluate the impact of preparation types (box-shaped and V-shaped) on microleakage.
• To assess the influence of different dentin bonding agents on microleakage.

Main Methods:

• Twenty extracted molars were prepared with box-shaped and V-shaped restorations.
• Restorations were sectioned occlusogingivally into eight surfaces for scoring.
• Surfaces were categorized as central, lateral, and end locations.
• Two calibrated raters scored microleakage using both two-surface and multiple-surface methods.

Main Results:

• A statistically significant difference was found in median microleakage scores between end two-surface and multiple-surface evaluations for V-shaped preparations with Scotchbond 2, P-50.
• Microleakage scores were notably higher at the end surfaces.
• No other significant differences were detected between the scoring methods or preparation types.

Conclusions:

• Microleakage may be more pronounced at the end surfaces of restorations.
• Including end surfaces in the scoring methodology provides a more accurate assessment of composite restoration microleakage.
• The findings support the inclusion of end surfaces in microleakage evaluations for V-shaped preparations.