Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 20, 2026
Shrinkage of Dental Composite in Simulated Cavity Measured with Digital Image Correlation
Published on: July 21, 2014
Influence of cavity margin location and preparation technique on microleakage of Class V composite restorations: An
Mauricio Schneider1, Jefferson David Melo de Matos2, Leonardo Galeazzi Farina3
1Department of Prosthodontics, Nova Southeastern University College of Dental Medicine, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA.
Background:
The characteristics of the prepared dental substrate and the cavity preparation technique may influence the quality of the adhesive interface and the marginal sealing of composite restorations. Ultrasonic cavity preparation using Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD) diamond tips has been proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional rotary instrumentation. This study aimed to evaluate the influence of cavity preparation techniques and cavity margin location on the microleakage of Class V composite resin restorations.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-four sound human third molars were used to prepare 48 standardized Class V cavities located at the cemento-enamel junction. Cavities were prepared using either a conventional high-speed diamond bur (KG Sorensen®) or an ultrasonic CVD diamond tip (CVDentus®). All preparations were restored with a fifth-generation etch-and-rinse adhesive system and a microhybrid composite resin. Following storage in distilled water at 37°C for seven days, specimens were immersed in 0.5% rhodamine B solution for 24 h, sectioned longitudinally, and evaluated under stereomicroscopy (40×). Microleakage was scored using a four-point ordinal scale. Data were analyzed using the Friedman nonparametric test and multiple comparisons (α=0.05).
Results:
The highest microleakage scores were observed in cavities with dentin margins. Mean rank values were 3.46 for the conventional bur/dentin group, 1.69 for the conventional bur/enamel group, 3.10 for the ultrasonic CVD/dentin group, and 1.75 for the ultrasonic CVD/enamel group. Groups with dentin margins showed significantly greater microleakage than enamel margins (p<0.05), whereas no significant differences were observed between conventional and ultrasonic cavity preparation (p>0.05).
Conclusions:
Cavity margin location significantly influenced microleakage, whereas the cavity preparation technique did not. Dentin margins exhibited significantly greater dye penetration than enamel margins regardless of the preparation method. Ultrasonic cavity preparation using CVD diamond tips demonstrated marginal sealing comparable to conventional rotary instrumentation and may be considered a viable alternative for minimally invasive restorative procedures.