Comparative evaluation of microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composite restorations in class v cavity preparation: an in-vitro study

Was to assess and compare the microleakage of G-aenial Universal Flo, Smart Dentin Replacement and Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composites in class V cavities along the occlusal and gingival margins using dye penetration test under stereomicroscope.

Seventy five human extracted premolars were selected and randomly divided into 3 groups (n=25), as per the restorative materials for microleakage test. Group I: Tetric Evo Ceram (Bulk fill non flowable). Group II: G-aenial Universal Flo (Highly filled flowable resin composite). Group III: Smart Dentin Replacement (Bulk fill flowable resin composite). Class V (box) cavities were prepared both on the buccal and lingual surfaces of each of the 75 teeth, a total of 150 cavities, restored, immersed in 2% methylene blue dye for 24 hours and then sectioned bucco lingually into two halves. Dye penetration score was measured along occlusal and gingival wall using a Stereomicroscope at 40X magnification. Statistical analysis was done using Chi square test for microleakage assessment. P value was set at.0.05.

Intergroup comparison showed statistically no significant difference between the three groups both occlusal and gingival wall, whereas groupwise comparison showed statistically significant result between group I and Group II at gingival wall with P value 0.021.

None of three resin composite materials were free from microleakage. All the three materials showed more microleakage at gingival wall compared to occlusal wall. Among all the tested groups G-aenial Universal Flo showed the least microleakage at the gingival wall.