Comparative evaluation of microleakage around class ii cavities restored with zirconomer, tetric n ceram, cention-n and glass ionomer cement- An in vitro study

Esthetic dentistry has shown much advancements in material and technology over time. Microleakageis one of the common factors affecting the integrity of tooth-restoration interface. Hence, the idea of study was to know which of the restorative materials were to be used in clinical practice for deep Class II restorations. Fifty human freshly extracted maxillary premolar teeth were selected and divided into five groups Group1(n=5),:no cavity preparation done, standardized class II cavities were prepared for rest of groups Group2(n=5):left unrestored, Group3(n=10): restored with Zirconomer, Group4(n=10): restored with Tetric N Ceram, Group5(n=10): restored with Cention N,Group6(n=10): restored with Glass Ionomer Cement .The specimens were thermocycled and two layers of nail varnish was applied on all surfaces except for 1mm around the restorative margins and apex was sealed with sticky wax. The samples were immersed in 0.5% methylene blue dye for 24 hrs, washed under running water, sectioned and observed under Stereomicroscope. The statistical analysis was done using kruskal wall is and Mann whitney U tests. All restored samples showed certain amount of microleakage. A statistically significant difference was observed between all the groups except Cention and Tetric N Ceram. Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that zirconomer showed maximum micro leakage followed by GIC, and Cention-N and Tetric N Ceram showing the least microleakage.