Clinical Assessment and Microleakage Evaluation of Three Esthetic Restorative Materials in Class II in Primary Molars

Aim : This study aimed to assess the clinical performance and to evaluate in-vitro microleakage
in class II in mandibular second primary molars restored with three esthetic restorative materials.
Materials and Methods: In the clinical part of the study, sixty second mandibular molars
indicated for class II preparation were divided into three equal groups. Molars were restored with
three esthetic restorative materials according to manufacturer instructions as follows: group (1)
Compomer (Dyract), group (2) Giomer (Beautifil) and group (3) Carbomer (GCP Glass Fill).
Molars were evaluated clinically every 3 months for one year using modified USPHS Criteria. In the
in-vitro part of the study thirty second mandibular molars were collected and divided in three equal
groups. Molars were restored as in the clinical groups and sealed at root apices. Samples were
subjected to thermocycling (500 cycles, 5˚C/ 55˚C) and immersed in methylene blue dye for 24
hours at 37°C. Specimens were sectioned mesio-distally and evaluated for microleakage by means
of dye penetration scoring under stereomicroscope. Data were recorded and analyzed statistically.
Results:
· Compomer and Giomer groups showed statistically significant clinical success than
the Carbomer group according to USPHS criteria.
· Microleakage at the gingival margin in all groups was statistically significantly higher
than at the occlusal surfaces.
· Compomer and Giomer showed the least microleakage scores in Class II cavity
preparations.
· Microleakage was statistically higher in Carbomer (GCP Glass Fill) group.
Conclusions: When esthetics and durability are of prime importance, compomer and Giomer
serve as advocated esthetic restorative materials in class II in primary molars.