• Kopkrit Hataiareerug D.D.S.
• Suchit Poolthong D.D.S., Grad. Dip. (Operative Dentistry), M.Sc., Ph.D.
• Ekamon Mahapoka D.D.S., Grad. Dip. (Operative Dentistry), Ph.D.

Objective To compare the microleakage at enamel and dentin margin before and after thermocycling
of a self-adhering flowable composite with using resin composite combined with bonding agent.

Materials and methods Class V cavities (n = 96) were prepared on buccal surfaces of 96 extracted
premolars. The teeth were divided into and 4 groups (n = 24) : 1. Vertise flow 2. Vertise flow +
Optibond all-in-one 3. Premise flow + Optibond all-in-one and 4. Premise + Optibond all-in-one.
The restored teeth from each group were divided into 2 subgroups (n = 12) : non-thermocycling and
thermocycling (1,000 cycles), then immersed in methylene blue for evaluation of the microleakage.
The leakage scores were statistical analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U (p < 0.05).

Results There was no significant difference of the leakage at enamel margin among the 4 material
groups both before and after thermocycling (p = 0.067 and p = 0.397, respectively). Vertise flow
demonstrated significantly higher leakage at dentin margin than the other groups both before and after
thermocycling (p < 0.000 and p = 0.001, respectively). Thermocycling showed no significant effect on
microleakage.

Conclusion Self-adhering flowable composite had no difference in microleakage at enamel margin
compared with resin composite combined with bonding agent, but had more microleakage at dentin
margin significantly. The use of bonding agent combinded with self-adhering flowable composite
might be an option to decrease microleakage. Thermocycling had no effect on microleakage.

(CU Dent J. 2014;37:15-24)