Investigation of the Er: YAG laser and diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of Class V cavities restored with different flowable composites

Elif Bahar Tuna; Emre Ozel; Yelda Kasimoglu; Erhan Firatli

doi:10.1002/jemt.22827

Investigation of the Er: YAG laser and diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of Class V cavities restored with different flowable composites

Microsc Res Tech. 2017 May;80(5):530-536. doi: 10.1002/jemt.22827. Epub 2017 Jan 23.

Authors

Elif Bahar Tuna¹, Emre Ozel², Yelda Kasimoglu¹, Erhan Firatli³

Affiliations

¹ Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey.
² Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Kocaeli, Kocaeli, Turkey.
³ Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Periodontology, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey.

PMID: 28112852
DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22827

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of the Er:YAG laser and diamond bur cavity preparation on the marginal microleakage of Class V cavities. Group 1: bur preparation (bp) + Vertise Flow (VF); Group 2: laser preparation (lp) + VF; Group 3: bp + Adper Easy One (AEO) + Filtek Ultimate Flowable Composite (FUFC); Group 4: lp + AEO + FUFC; Group 5: bp + Clearfil S3 Bond (CSB) + Clearfil Majesty Flow (CMF); Group 6: lp + CSB + CMF. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests (p < .05). More microleakage was observed in cervical regions compared to occlusal regions in all groups (p < .05). No significant difference was observed among all groups in terms of occlusal and cervical surfaces, respectively (p > .05). The use of the Er:YAG laser for cavity preparation with different adhesive systems and flowable composites did not influence microleakage.

Keywords: Class V cavity; Er:YAG laser; microleakage; self-adhering flowable composite.