TY  - JOUR
T1  - INVESTIGATION OF DIFFERENT ADHESIVE SYSTEMS AND COMPOSITES IN TERMS OF MICROLEAKAGE IN CONVENTIONAL METHOD AND ER:YAG LASER PREPARED CLASS V CAVITIES
TT  - Farklı Adeziv Sistemlerin ve Kompozitlerin Geleneksel Yöntem ve ER:YAG Lazer ile Hazırlanmış Sınıf V Kavitelerde Mikrosızıntı Açısından Araştırılması
AU  - Kargı, Sena
AU  - Özel, Emre
PY  - 2025
DA  - August
Y2  - 2025
DO  - 10.21306/dishekimligi.1682505
JF  - Journal of International Dental Sciences (Uluslararası Diş Hekimliği Bilimleri Dergisi)
JO  - J Int Dent Sci
PB  - Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit Üniversitesi
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2149-8628
SP  - 98
EP  - 108
VL  - 11
IS  - 2
LA  - en
AB  - Aim: The aim of this study is to examine the microleakage caused by different adhesive systems and composites in class V cavities prepared with traditional method and Er:YAG laser.Material and Methods: 48 permanent molars without decay and restoration were removed and kept in distilled water after residual tissue were removed. Eight groups were formed with six teeth in each group; Group-1: Bur preparation (Bp)+ CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick (UBQ)+CLEARFIL MAJESTY ES-2 Classic (ME2); Group-2: (Bp)+Bisco Universal PrimerTM (UP)+(ME2); Group-3: (Bp)+(UBQ)+Ceram X SphereTECTM (CX); Group-4: (Bp)+(UP)+(CX); Group-5: Laser preparation (Lp)+(UBQ)+(ME2); Group-6: (Lp)+(UP)+(ME2); Group-7: (Lp)+(UBQ)+(CX); Group-8: (Lp)+(UP)+(CX). All teeth were thermocycled 1500 times (5–550C). Then it was kept in 0.5% basic fuchsin for 24 hours . The dye penetration at the adhesive system-dentin interface in longitudinal sectioned class V cavities was evaluated under stereo microscopy according to the score table prepared by two observers. The adhesive material-dentin interfaces and the structure of the hybrid layer were examined by Scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis. Statistical analyzes were tested with Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal Wallis One-Way Analysis of Variance and Dunn's multiple comparison (p<0.05). Results: Microleakage scores on the cervical surfaces were higher than the occlusal surfaces in all groups. In addition, it was determined that the cavity preparation method did not create a statistically significant difference between the microleakage values on the occlusal surfaces of the restorations (p>0.05). It was observed that the adhesion method did not present a statistically significant result in terms of microleakage (p>0.05). Conclusion: Clearfil Majesty ES 2 composite was observed to be more successful in terms of microleakage. Clearfil Majesty ES 2 composite can be preferred for restoration of class V cavities. More laboratory and clinical studies are needed to determine the performance of adhesive systems in cavities prepared with laser.
KW  - Microleakage
KW  - Universal adhesive
KW  - Er:YAG laser
KW  - Class V cavity
N2  - Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, geleneksel yöntem ve Er:YAG lazerle hazırlanmış sınıf V kavitelerde farklı adeziv sistemler ve kompozitlerin neden olduğu mikrosızıntıyı incelemektir.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çürüme ve restorasyonu olmayan 48 daimi azı dişi çıkarılarak, artakalan dokular temizlendikten sonra distile suda muhafaza edildi. Altı dişten oluşan sekiz grup oluşturuldu; Grup-1: Frez hazırlığı (Bp)+ CLEARFIL Universal Bond Quick (UBQ)+CLEARFIL MAJESTY ES-2 Classic (ME2); Grup-2: (Bp)+Bisco Universal PrimerTM (UP)+(ME2); Grup-3: (Bp)+(UBQ)+Ceram X SphereTECTM (CX); Grup-4: (Bp)+(UP)+(CX); Grup-5: Lazer hazırlığı (Lp)+(UBQ)+(ME2); Grup-6: (Lp)+(UP)+(ME2); Grup-7: (Lp)+(UBQ)+(CX); Grup-8: (Lp)+(UP)+(CX). Tüm dişler 1500 kez termal döngüye (5–550C) tabi tutuldu. Daha sonra %0,5 bazik füçsin içerisinde 24 saat bekletildi. Boya penetrasyonu, iki gözlemci tarafından hazırlanan skor tablosuna göre stereo mikroskop altında sınıf V kavite uzunlamasına kesitlerinde, adeziv sistem-dentin ara yüzeyinde değerlendirildi. Adeziv materyal-dentin ara yüzeyleri ve hibrit tabakanın yapısı Taramalı Elektron Mikroskobu (SEM) analizi ile incelendi. İstatistiksel analizler Mann-Whitney U testi, Kruskal Wallis Tek-Yönlü Varyans Analizi ve Dunn'ın çoklu karşılaştırma testi ile değerlendirildi (p<0.05). Bulgular: Tüm gruplarda servikal yüzeylerdeki mikrosızıntı skorlarının oklüzal yüzeylerden daha yüksek olduğu belirlendi. Ayrıca, kavite hazırlama yönteminin restorasyonların oklüzal yüzeylerindeki mikrosızıntı değerleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark yaratmadığı (p>0.05) belirlendi. Adeziv yöntemin mikrosızıntı açısından istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir sonuç vermediği gözlemlendi (p>0.05). Sonuç: Clearfil Majesty ES 2 kompozitin mikrosızıntı açısından daha başarılı olduğu gözlemlendi. Clearfil Majesty ES 2 kompozit sınıf V kavite restorasyonu için tercih edilebilir. Lazer ile hazırlanan kavitelerde adeziv sistemlerin performansını belirlemek için daha fazla laboratuvar ve klinik çalışmaya ihtiyaç vardır.
CR  - 1. Güler Ç, Bayar F. Farklı tipteki restoratif cam
iyonomer simanların mikrosızıntı üzerine ısı
uygulanmasının etkisi. Selcuk Dent J. 2020;7:233-
239.
CR  - 2. Kasraei S, Azarsina M, Majidi S. In vitro
comparison of microleakage of posterior composites
with and whitout liner using two step etch and reines
and self-etch dentin adhesive system. Oper Dent.
2011;36:213-221.
CR  - 3. Zhang Y, Chen W, Zhang J, Li Y. Does
Er,Cr:YSGG reduce the microleakage of restorations
when used for cavity preparation? A systematic
review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health.
2020;20:269.
CR  - 4. Mosharrafian S, Heidari A, Rahbar P.
Microleakage of two bulk fill and one conventional
composite in Class II restorations of primary
posterior teeth. J Dent (Tehran). 2017;14:123-131.
CR  - 5. Kidd EA. Mikroleakage: A review. J Dent.
1976;4:199-206.
CR  - 6. Özel E, Tuna EB, Firatli S, Firatli E. Comparison
of total-etch, self-etch, and selective etching
techniques on class V composite restorations
prepared by Er:YAG laser and bur: a scanning
electron microscopy study. Microsc Res Tech.
2016;79:998-1004.
CR  - 7. Yıkılgan İ, Akgül S, Kuşoğlu A, Bala O, Ömürlü
H, Türköz M. Farklı kaide materyali kullanımının
sınıf V restorasyonların mikrosızıntısı üzerine etkisi.
Acta Odontol Turc. 2017;34:31-37.
CR  - 8. Hamouda IM, Samra NR. Microtensile bond
strength of etch and rinse vs self-etch adhesive
systems. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 2011;4:461-
466.
CR  - 9. Tuna EB, Ozel E, Kasimoglu Y, Firatli E.
Investigation of the Er:YAG laser and diamond bur
cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of
Class V cavities restored with different flowable
composites. Microsc Res Tech. 2017;80:530-536.
CR  - 10. Brännström M, Glantz PO, Nordenvall KJ. The
effect of some cleaning solutions on the morphology
of dentin prepared in different ways: an in-vivo
study. ASDC J Dent Child. 1979;46:291-295.
CR  - 11. Cardoso MV, Coutinho E, Ermis RB, Poitevin A,
Van Landuyt K, De Munck J. Influence of dentin cavity
surface finishing on micro-tensile bond strength of
adhesives. Dent Mater. 2008;24:492-501.
CR  - 12. Malekafzali B, Asnaashari M, Javadi F. Comparison
of marginal microleakage of flowable composite
restorations in primary canine teeth prepared with highspeed diamond bur, Er:YAG laser and Er,Cr:YSGG
laser. Laser Ther. 2017;26:195-202.
CR  - 13. Coluzzi DJ. Fundamentals of dental lasers: science
and instruments. Dent Clin North Am. 2004;48:751-770.
CR  - 14. Mir M, Meister J, Franzen R, Sabounchi SS, Lampert
F, Gutknecht N. Influence of water-layer thickness on
Er:YAG laser ablation of enamel of bovine anterior
teeth. Lasers Med Sci. 2008;23:451-457.
CR  - 15. Watanabe H, Ishikawa I, Suzuki M, Hasegawa K.
Clinical assessments of the Erbium:YAG laser for soft
tissue surgery and scaling. J Clin Laser Med Surg.
1996;14:67-75.
CR  - 16. De Munck J, Van Meerbeek B, Yudhira R,
Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Micro-tensile bond strength
of two adhesives to Erbium:YAG-lased vs bur-cut
enamel and dentin. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002;110:322-329.
CR  - 17. Bahadır HS, Bağlar S, Bulut AC, Karadağ G. Farklı
kavite preparasyon yöntemi kullanılarak prepare edilen
sınıf V kavitelerinin farklı cam iyonomer simanlarla
restore edilerek mikrosızıntısının değerlendirilmesi. Turk
J Clin Lab. 2019;10:301-309.
CR  - 18. García Marí L, Climent Gil A, Llena Puy C. In vitro
evaluation of microleakage in Class II composite
restorations: High-viscosity bulk-fill vs conventional
composites. Dent Mater J. 2019;38:721-727.
CR  - 19. Gogna R, Jagadis S, Shashikal K. A comparative in
vitro study of microleakage by a radioactive isotope and
compressive strength of three nanofilled composite resin
restorations. J Conserv Dent. 2011;14:128-131.
CR  - 20. Singh P, Tyagi S, Mahendra M, Diwedi V.
Evaluation of microleakage in class V composite
restoration by using flowable composite and resin
modified glass ionomer as liners. J Adv Med Dent Scie
Res. 2020;8:26-30.
CR  - 21. Sabbah A. Microleakage of cavity class V restored
by glass ionomer restorations in primary molars
conditioned by Er,Cr:YSGG laser versus conventional
method (an in vitro study). Egypt Dent J. 2020;66:781-
788.
CR  - 22. Ferracane JL. Models of caries formation around
dental composite restorations. J Dent Res.
2017;96:364-371.
CR  - 23. Owens BM, Phebus JG, Johnson WW.
Evaluation of the marginal integrity of a bioactive
restorative material. Gen Dent. 2018;66:32-36.
CR  - 24. Pfeifer CSC, Braga RR, Cardoso PEC. Influence
of cavity dimensions, insertion technique and
adhesive system on microleakage of Class V
restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137:197-202.
CR  - 25. Mutluay AT, Mutluay M. Effects of different
disinfection methods on microleakage of giomer
restorations. Eur J Dent. 2019;13:569-573.
CR  - 26. Bertrand M-F, Semez G, Leforestier E, MullerBolla M, Nammour S, Rocca J-P. Er:YAG laser
cavity preparation and composite resin bonding with
a single-component adhesive system: relationship
between shear bond strength and microleakage.
Lasers Surg Med. 2006;38:615-623.
CR  - 27. Özel E, Tuna EB, Firatli E. The effects of cavityfilling techniques on microleakage in class II resin
restorations prepared with Er:YAG laser and
diamond bur: a scanning electron microscopy study.
Scanning. 2016;38:389-395.
CR  - 28. Özsevik A, Sürmelioğlu D, Tosun S, Bacaksız B,
Şirin Karaarslan E. The effect of silane content on
microleakage of the adhesive systems. Int Dent Sci J.
2015;1:13-19.
CR  - 29. Motevaselian F, Yassine E, Mirzaee M,
Kharazifard MJ, Heydari S, Shafiee M. In vitro
microleakage of class V composite restorations in
use of three adhesive systems. J Islam Dent Assoc
Iran. 2016;28:14-19.
CR  - 30. Delmé KI, De Moor RJ. Scanning electron
microscopic evaluation of enamel and dentin
surfaces after Er:YAG laser preparation and laser
conditioning. Photomed Laser Surg. 2007;25:393-
401.
CR  - 31. Chaitra TR, Subba Reddy VV, Devarasa GM,
Ravishankar TL. Microleakage and SEM analysis of
flowable resin used as a sealant following three
fissure preparation techniques: an in vitro study. J
Clin Pediatr Dent. 2011;35:277-282.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.21306/dishekimligi.1682505
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/4800908
ER  -