<?xml version="1.0"?>
<Articles JournalTitle="Frontiers in Dentistry">
  <Article>
    <Journal>
      <PublisherName>Tehran University of Medical Sciences</PublisherName>
      <JournalTitle>Frontiers in Dentistry</JournalTitle>
      <Issn>2676-296X</Issn>
      <Volume>5</Volume>
      <Issue>3</Issue>
      <PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
        <Year>2008</Year>
        <Month>09</Month>
        <Day>15</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </Journal>
    <title locale="en_US">Microleakage of Class II Combined Amalgam-Composite Restorations Using Different Composites and Bonding Agents</title>
    <FirstPage>126</FirstPage>
    <LastPage>130</LastPage>
    <AuthorList>
      <Author>
        <FirstName></FirstName>
        <LastName>F. Sharafeddin</LastName>
        <affiliation locale="en_US">Associate Professor, Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Me</affiliation>
      </Author>
      <Author>
        <FirstName></FirstName>
        <LastName>H. Moradian</LastName>
        <affiliation locale="en_US">Post Graduate Student, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of</affiliation>
      </Author>
    </AuthorList>
    <History>
      <PubDate PubStatus="received">
        <Year>2015</Year>
        <Month>10</Month>
        <Day>03</Day>
      </PubDate>
    </History>
    <abstract locale="en_US">Objective: The purpose of the present study was to assess the microleakage of composite restorations with and without a cervical amalgam base and to compare the results of dif-ferent composites and bonding agents.


Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty mesio-occlusal (MO) and disto-occlusal (DO) Class II cavities were prepared on sixty extracted permanent premolar teeth. The teeth were randomly divided into four groups of 30 and restored as follows:
In group A, the mesio-occlusal cavity (MO), Scotchbond multi purpose plus + Z250 and in the disto-occlusal (DO) cavity, Prompt-L-Pop + Z250 were applied. As for group B, in the MO and DO cavities, Clearfil SE Bond + Clearfil APX, and varnish + amalgam (In box) + Clearfil SE Bond + Clearfil APX were used respectivelywhile in group C; the teeth were restored with amalgam and varnish mesio-occlusally and with amalgam only disto-occlusally. As for group D, varnish + amalgam (in box) + Scotchbond multi purpose plus + Z250 were applied mesio-occlusally and Varnish + Amalgam (in box) + Prompt&#x2013;L&#x2013;Pop + Z250 disto-occlusally.
Marginal leakage was assessed by the degree of dye penetration into various sections of the restored teeth. Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests were used for data analysis.


Results: Microleakage in gingival margin was more than that in occlusal margin (P&lt;0.05) and microleakage of combined amalgam-composite restorations was significantly lower than that of conventional composite and amalgam restorations.


Conclusion: Marginal microleakage decreased by using amalgam at the base of the box in Class II composite restorations.</abstract>
    <web_url>https://fid.tums.ac.ir/index.php/fid/article/view/160</web_url>
    <pdf_url>https://fid.tums.ac.ir/index.php/fid/article/download/160/160</pdf_url>
  </Article>
</Articles>
