Purpose: To compare the adhesion of a flowable resin-based composite (RBC) vs. a condensable RBC to tooth structure using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Materials and Methods: Fifteen recently extracted human teeth were prepared for Class I restorations and equally divided into three groups. Group 1 was filled with Heliomolar bonded with Syntac Single Component. Group 2 was lined with Flow-It in addition to ALERT condensable RBC bonded with Bond-1 Primer/Adhesive. Group 3 was filled with ALERT bonded with Bond-1 Primer/Adhesive. All teeth were thermocycled, sectioned and evaluated for gap formation with the SEM. Results: SEM at x15 demonstrated that restorations with the flowable RBC at the tooth/restoration interface showed no evidence of marginal gaps between the RBC material or at the underlying tooth structure. A significant difference (P< 0.05) in wall adaptation was found between Groups 2 and 3.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Number of pages||3|
|Journal||American journal of dentistry|
|State||Published - Aug 2000|
ASJC Scopus subject areas