No correlation between two methodological approaches applied to evaluate cervical margin relocation

Dent Mater J. 2020 Aug 2;39(4):624-632. doi: 10.4012/dmj.2018-410. Epub 2020 Apr 16.

Abstract

The study evaluated the quality of gingival margins created by cervical margin relocation (CMR) technique using different materials and assessed the consistency of the results obtained by two in vitro methods: microleakage test and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Mesio-occlusal-distal cavities with subgingival proximal margins were prepared. Mesial margins were elevated supragingivally with total-etch adhesive and flowable composite (Group 1) or with universal adhesive and bulk-fill flowable composite (Group 2). Distal margins were not elevated. Teeth were restored with CAD/CAM overlays. Marginal quality was evaluated by microleakage test and SEM observation of epoxy resin replicas. Statistical analyses showed no significant correlations between microleakage scores and percentage of marginal integrity observed under SEM at CMR margins, lower microleakage scores at margins without CMR compared to CMR margins, lower microleakage scores in Group 2 than in Group 1 and no difference in SEM integrity between groups at CMR margins.

Keywords: Adhesion; Cervical margin relocation; Composite; Marginal quality; Marginal seal.

MeSH terms

  • Composite Resins
  • Computer-Aided Design
  • Dental Cavity Preparation
  • Dental Leakage*
  • Dental Marginal Adaptation
  • Dental Restoration, Permanent*
  • Resin Cements

Substances

  • Composite Resins
  • Resin Cements