Effect of Adhesive Pretreatments on Marginal Sealing of Aged Nano-ionomer Restorations

Abstract

Background and aims. Nano-ionomer (NI) interacts with tooth structures superficially, and there is a concern about the enamel bonding ability of mild self-etch Ketac primer. This study compared the effect of different adhesive procedures (self-etching and etch-and-rinse approach) on long-term marginal microleakage of nano-filled resin-modified glass-ionomer (NI) cervical restorations. Materials and methods. Class V cavities were prepared on 72 maxillary premolars. The teeth were divided into six groups: G1: No treatment (NC); G2: Ketac primer (K primer); G3: Etchant + Ketac primer (E+K primer); G4: Self-etch adhesive (Bond Force); G5: Etchant + Bond Force (E+Bond Force); G6: Etchant + Adper Single Bond (Etch and rinse adhesive). All the cavities were restored with Ketac N100. The samples were stored in water for 6 months and thermocycled for 2000 cycles. Marginal sealing was assessed using dye penetration technique. Data were analyzed with non-parametric tests (α=0.05). Results. All the adhesive pretreatments resulted in a lower marginal leakage than that of NC (P≤0.01), except for E+Bond Force at the dentin margin. There was no significant difference between K primer and Bond Force. Microleakage differed significantly between K primer pretreatment and E+K primer (P=0.003), E+Bond Force (P=0.002) and etch-and-rinse adhesive (P=0.001) at the enamel margin, but it did not differ at the dentin margin. E+ Bond Force group showed insignificantly lower leakage at the enamel margin and significantly higher leakage at the dentin margin (P=0.02). Conclusion. Etch-and-rinse adhesive and selective enamel etching along with self-etch adhesive/Ketac primer might improve marginal sealing of aged nano-ionomer restoration.

Keywords

• Acid etching
• self-etch adhesive
• etch-and-rinse adhesive
• microleakage
• nano-ionomer