Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Class II Restorations Using Open- and Closed-Sandwich Techniques With Zirconomer as an Intermediate Material: An In-Vitro Study

Abstract

To evaluate and compare the microleakage In class II restorations using open-and closed-sandwich techniques with zirconomer as an intermediate material. Material and methodTwenty-six non-carious mandibular first molars were selected and randomly divided into two groups (groups 1 and 2 where n=13). A standardized Class II preparation was made with the cervical margin 1 mm below the cementum-enamel junction. Samples of group 1 were restored using the open-sandwich technique and samples of group 2 with the close-sandwich technique, and zirconomer was used as an intermediate restorative material. Following that, the restorations underwent 200 heat cycles with dwell times of 20 seconds at 5°C and 55°C. Dye penetration and scanning electron microscope (SEM) analysis using the replica approach were used to assess adaptation at the cervical margin. The data were statistically analyzed using the Paired T-test (p<0.05). ResultsLower dye penetration was seen in the open-sandwich technique compared to the closed-sandwich technique (p<0.001). ConclusionWhen comparing the open-sandwich technique with the closed one, it was observed that less microleakage was seen in the open-sandwich technique as it has better marginal adaptation and fewer voids.

Microleakage of Glass Ionomer/composite restoration in Class II cavity in primary molars

“…The microleakage scores at the gingival margin between glass ionomer / tooth structure interface in open sandwich technique (group I) are presented in Table I and Graph (1).…”

“…The gaps at the tooth-restoration interface, known as microleakage, allow the ingress of acids, ions, enzymes, and their byproducts, increasing the risk of secondary caries. (1)(2)(3) Class II composite restorations, especially at the cervical margins, are particularly susceptible to microleakage and secondary caries. (4) Despite the introduction of dentin bonding agents, microleakage remains a common problem, as resin materials bond weaker to dentin compared to etched enamel.…”