Objectives: Central to the success of a restoration is the quality of the restoration-dentin interfacial seal and any compromise of the seal can lead to 2° or recurrent decay. Class V restorations have a high leakage propensity and this study evaluates the effect of liner/base placement on leakage behavior. Methods: Class V intra-coronal preparations, 3x2x2 mm, were cut in 4 groups (n=10) of single rooted teeth with individual new burs. The pulp chambers and root canals of all teeth were extirpated with endodontic files and cleaned. All cavity preparations were etched, conditioned with Optibond Solo and restored with TPH composite resin but the groups differed in the liner/base usage. The 1st group of teeth had no liner or base while a liner (Dycal) was placed in the 2nd group of teeth prior to conditioning and restoration. A base (Vitrebond) was placed in the 3rd group of cavity preparations while both a liner and a base were placed in the 4th group. After preparation, bare ended pvc-covered copper wire was inserted apically into each tooth to contact with the pulp chamber roof. Leakage was followed electrochemically for 35 days in 0.9% NaCl using a 20 V dc power source and a stainless steel counter electrode. Results: All the teeth leaked to some degree. However, teeth restored without liner or base showed the least leakage while teeth restored with both a base and a liner exhibited the most leakage. Teeth restored with a base leaked more than those with a liner. Conclusions: The findings indicate that the presence of a base and/or a liner results in greater leakage than that found with intra-coronal Class V preparations that were only conditioned and restored. The data suggest that the placement of both a base and a liner significantly increase restoration leakage.

Back to the Dental Materials: VIII - Others-Non-metallic Program
Back to the IADR/AADR/CADR 83rd General Session (March 9-12, 2005)

Top Level Search