Name: Geraldo Marcio de Azevedo Júnior
Type: MSc dissertation
Publication date: 12/02/2020
Advisor:
Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| Jackeline Coutinho Guimarães | Advisor * |
Examining board:
| Name |
Role |
|---|---|
| Claudia Machado de Almeida Mattos | External Examiner * |
| Jackeline Coutinho Guimarães | Advisor * |
| Juliana Malacarne Zanon | Internal Examiner * |
Summary: The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the marginal microleakage in restorations with different bulk-fill resin composite (RBC) when compared with a conventional resinbased composite (RC). Standardized cavities in the buccal aspect of bovine centralincisors were made. The prepared teeth were randomly distributed into five groupsaccording to restorative material: FTKC (RC Filtek Z350 XT/3M ESPE); FTKBC (RBCFiltek Bulk Fill /3M ESPE); ARBC (RBC Aura Bulk Fill/SDI); TNBC (RBC Tetric NCeram Bulk Fill/Ivoclar Vivadent); and SF (RBC SonicFill/Kerr). After thermocycling the samples were immersed in aqueous solution to 1% methylene blue for 24 hours. The teeth were subsequently sectioned in the region of the restorations in the cervicalincisal direction. For each sample, images of the two restored margins (I incisal; C
cervical) were obtained using a stereomicroscope with 20x magnification. The
microleakage degree was classified through an ordinal score system (0 to 4). For the statistical analysis, the Kruskal-Wallis test were as used to evaluate the microleakage of different composite resins (α= 0.05), and the Wilcoxon test were as used to compare the microleakage between the analyzed margins (α= 0.05). The results showed no significant difference in microleakage between the groups, between the different RBCs and between the different evaluated margins (C and I) of the restoration. It is concluded that, regardless of the evaluated margin of restoration, the marginal microleakage of
the different RBCs is similar to that of a RC; in addition, we were found no differences in marginal microleakage among the evaluated RBCs
