This in vitro study evaluated the marginal microleakage of composite inlays luted with 3 different cement systems. The null hypothesis was that the luting materials would not influence dye penetration, showing the same degree of microleakage. Thirty-six sound molars were selected, mesio-occlusodistal cavities were prepared, and the teeth were randomly divided into 3 groups (n = 12). Composite resin inlay restorations were made and cemented using a dual-curing resin cement (Calibra), a light-curing flowable composite (Charisma Flow), or a self-adhesive resin cement (RelyX Unicem). The restored teeth were subjected to fatigue cycles and immersed in 0.5% basic fuchsin dye for 24 hours. Two orthogonal cuts were made to enable evaluation of dye penetration at the cervical and occlusal margins. The sections were evaluated with a 4-point scale ranging from 0 (no penetration) to 3 (penetration up to the cavity floor [occlusal margins] or axial wall [cervical margins]). The Calibra and Charisma Flow groups showed greater microleakage, notably at the cervical margins, whereas RelyX Unicem specimens showed the least dye penetration. Significant differences were found between the Calibra and Charisma Flow groups and between the Charisma Flow and RelyX Unicem groups (P < 0.05). No statistically significant differences were detected between the Calibra and RelyX Unicem groups. The microleakage associated with the flowable composite was significantly greater than that associated with both resin cements, results that discourage its use for luting of Class II composite inlays.
Keywords: cementation; dental leakage; dental restoration; inlay; resin cement.