COMPARISON OF EXTENT OF MICROLEAKAGE IN RESIN MODIFIED GLASS IONOMER CEMENT VERSUS FLOWABLE COMPOSITE LINING MATERIALS UNDER CLASS 2 COMPOSITE RESTORATION

Abstract

Objective: To compare the extent of microleakage between resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC) and flowable composite when used as lining materials under Class II composite restorations.

Methodology: Sixty caries-free extracted third molars were collected and randomly divided into two groups of 30 each. Teeth with amelogenesis imperfecta, dentinogenesis imperfecta, or fluorosis were excluded. Group I was lined with flowable composite, and Group II with RMGIC. Microleakage was assessed by dye penetration at the tooth-restoration interface under a stereomicroscope at 25X magnification. The depth of dye penetration indicated the extent of microleakage. Data were analyzed using an independent t-test.

Results: The sample included 27 females (45%) and 33 males (55%), with a mean age of 33.68±9.85 years. The overall mean microleakage was 8.44±3.06 mm. Group II (RMGIC) showed significantly higher mean microleakage (10.65±2.20 mm) compared to Group I (flowable composite) with 6.23±2.02 mm (p<0.001). This significant difference persisted across all age groups and both genders (p<0.001).

Conclusion: RMGIC demonstrated significantly greater microleakage compared to flowable composite when used as a lining material under Class II composite restorations. Microleakage was not associated with patient gender or age group.