Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 2508
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Year : 2012  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 233-236

Comparative evaluation of traditional and self-priming hydrophilic resin

1 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Dr. H.S.J. Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Chandigarh, India
2 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, J.N.Kapoor D.A.V. (C) Dental College, Yamunanagar, India
3 Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Swami Devi Dayal Hospital and Dental College, Barwala, Haryana, India

Correspondence Address:
Ruchi Singla
Assistant Professor, Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Dr. H.S.J. Institute of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Chandigarh
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.97944

Rights and Permissions

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the microleakage of traditional composite (Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond) and self-priming resin (Embrace Wetbond). Materials and Methods: Standardized Class V cavities partly in enamel and cementum were prepared in 20 extracted human premolars. Teeth were divided into two groups. Group 1 was restored with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and Group 2 with Embrace Wetbond. The specimens were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 h and then subjected to 200 thermocycles at 5°C and 55°C with a 1 min dwell time. After thermocycling teeth were immersed in a 0.2% solution of methylene blue dye for 24 h. Teeth were sectioned vertically approximately midway through the facial and lingual surfaces using a diamond saw blade. Microleakage was evaluated at enamel and cementum surfaces using 10 Χ stereomicroscope. The statistical analysis was performed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: Wetbond showed less microleakage at occlusal and gingival margins as compared with Charisma/Gluma Comfort Bond and the results were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Class V cavities restored with Embrace Wetbond with fewer steps and fewer materials offers greater protection against microleakage at the tooth restorative interface.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded172    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal