Gingival microleakage of class V composite restorations with fiber inserts

This study investigated the effect of different fiber inserts (glass and polyethylene), bonding agents, and resin composites on the gingival margin microleakage of class V composite restorations.

Sixty premolars were sterilized and mounted in acrylic resin bases. Class V cavities were prepared buccally and lingually, 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction, comprising 12 groups (n = 10). In the experimental groups fiber inserts were cut and placed at the gingival seat, while the control groups had no inserts. Combinations of two composite materials, Filtek-Z250 and Filtek-LS (3M-ESPE), and four bonding agents, Clearfil SE bond (Kuraray) (C), Scotch Bond Multipurpose (3M-ESPE) (SB), Prime and Bond NT (Dentsply) (PB), and Filtek-LS (3M-ESPE) (LS) were used. Restorations were incrementally inserted and polymerized for 40s. Specimens were then stored in distilled water for 7 days and thermocycled for 500 cycles. Teeth surfaces were sealed with nail polish except for 1 mm around restoration margins and immersed in 2% red procion dye. Teeth were then sectioned buccolingually and dye penetration was assessed with five-point scale. Data were statistically-analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis, ANOVA and Tukey's tests (α = 5%).

Mean microleakage scores varied from 0.40 (Groups C, C with polyethylene, LS, LS with polyethylene) to 1.50 (SB).

Different bonding agents led to differences in microleakage scores where C and LS showed significantly lower microleakage than PB. SB had highest mean microleakage score, however, incorporation of fibers resulted in significant reduction in microleakage.

Class V resin composite restorations bonded with a total-etch adhesive had a significant reduction in mean microleakage scores when glass or polyethylene fibers were placed at the gingival cavo-surface margin. In contrast, for two self-etch adhesive systems, the incorporation of fibers had no significant effect on mean microleakage scores.