Comparative evaluation of marginal adaptation of three different base materials used in closed sandwich technique for class 2 composite restoration : An In Vitro Study

Main Article Content

Anupama Ahirwar, Hema B.S, Nidhi Shrivastava, Nishita Grandhi, Saloni Agarwal, Vikalp Bansal


Objective:-The aim of the study is to compare the gingival microleakage of  Biodentine, Ketac Molar and Fusion ultra D/C in posterior deep Class II closed sandwich composite restoration.Materials& Methods:-Conventional mesio-occlusal cavities were prepared on 40 extracted maxillary first premolars, each with dimensions of 2 mm buccolingually, and the gingival seat positioned at the cementoenamel junction level. The teeth were then divided into four groups (n=10). In the control group (Group 1), cavities were restored with composite(Tetric N ceram) using a self-etch bonding agent (IvoclarTetric N bond). In Groups 2, 3, and 4, a 0.8 mm thick liner of Fusion Ultra D/C, Ketac Molar and Biodentine respectively, was applied to the axial wall of the cavity. Subsequently, all cavities were restored with composite using the same self-etch bonding agent as in Group 1. After restoration, the specimens were immersed in a 0.5% aqueous solution of rhodamine B dye for 24 hours. Statistical analysis was conducted using the ANOVA test for intergroup comparison, followed by the Tukey’s Post Hoc test for intragroup comparisonResults:-Lower dye penetration was observed in Biodentine and Ketac molar when contrasted with the Fusion Ultra D/C.Conclusion:-In our study the microleakage scores were significantly lesser in those teeth where keatac molar &Biodentine were used as a liner as compared to Fusion Ultra D/C.

Article Details