COMPARISON OF MICROLEAKAGE IN CLASS V CAVITIES RESTORED BY GLASS IONOMER CEMENT AND COMPOSITE WITH OR WITHOUT PROTECTIVE COATING MATERIAL

Abstract

Background: In order to treat cervical lesion of teeth, class V cavity is prepared and filled with restored materials. However, class V restoration is a common challenge to clinicians: low retention capacity, marginal defect and secondary caries due to microleakages. The aim of this study was to compare microleakage of class V cavities restored by glass ionomer cement and composite restoration with or without protective coating material. Materials and Methods: 60 extracted premolars were randomly divided into 6 groups (n=10/ group). Each group were prepared and restored with one of three materials: conventional glass ionomer (CGIC), resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGIC) and composite, with or without G-Coat Plus. All samples were thermocycled, immersed in 0.5% Fuschin solution and evaluated microleakage by dye penetration. Results: Gingival margin showed higher microleakage than occlusal margin in Composite group and CGIC groups with G-Coat Plus (p < 0.05). RMGIC showed lower microleakage than CGIC and Composite when assessed on gingival margin (p < 0.05). G-Coat Plus reduced the microleakage in the RMGIC and Composite groups when compared with the uncoated group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Microleakage depends on evaluated site and restored materials. Protective coating material reduces microleakage, especially on RMGIC and Composite restorations. Key words: microleakage, class V cavity, glass ionomer cement, composite, provetive coating