Marginal adaptation of composite resins under two adhesive techniques

In the present research, different adhesive techniques were used to set up fillings with composite resins. After the application of etch and rinse or self etch adhesive technique, marginal adaptation of composite fillings was estimated by the length of margins without gaps, and by the microretention of resin in enamel and dentin. The study material consisted of 40 extracted teeth. Twenty Class V cavities were treated with 35% phosphorous acid and restored after rinsing by Adper Single Bond 2 and Filtek Ultimate‐ASB/FU 3M ESPE composite system. The remaining 20 cavities were restored by Adper Easy One‐AEO/FU 3M ESPE composite system. Marginal adaptation of composite fillings was examined using a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The etch and rinse adhesive technique showed a significantly higher percentage of margin length without gaps (in enamel: 92.5%, in dentin: 57.3%), compared with the self‐etch technique with lower percentage of margin length without gaps, in enamel 70.4% (p < .001), and in dentin‐22.6% (p < .05). In the first technique, microretention was composed of adhesive and hybrid layers as well as resin tugs in interprismatic spaces of enamel, while the dentin microretention was composed of adhesive and hybrid layers with resin tugs in dentin canals. In the second technique, resin tugs were rarely seen and a microgap was dominant along the border of restoration margins. The SEM analysis showed a better marginal adaptation of composite resin to enamel and dentin with better microretention when the etch and rinse adhesive procedure was applied.