SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Meandros Medical And Dental Journal / 2026 / Volume: 27 Issue: 3

Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Biodentine, Glass Ionomer Cement, and Composite Resin Used for Dentin Restoration: An In Vitro Study

Dentin Çürüğü Restorasyonlarında Biodentine, Cam İyonomer Siman ve Kompozit Rezin ile Oluşan Mikrosızıntının Karşılaştırılması

Elif Kuru(UŞAK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-0396-7677
Nesrin Eronat(EGE UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY, DENTISTRY PR.)0000-0002-1675-5091
Murat Turkun(EGE ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ PR.)0000-0001-7405-1677
Dilşah Çoğulu(EGE UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY)0000-0002-3156-9801
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Biodentine demonstrated significantly lower microleakage compared with glass ionomer cement and comparable sealing performance to composite resin in coronal dentin cavities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the microleakage of a calcium silicate–based material (Biodentine) with glass ionomer cement (GIC) and composite resin in standardized coronal dentin cavities in-vitro.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Standardized dentin cavities (4×2×2 mm) were prepared and randomly assigned to three groups (n=20 of each): Biodentine, GIC (Fuji IX), and composite resin (Clearfil SE Bond + Filtek Z250).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Biodentine demonstrated significantly lower microleakage compared with glass ionomer cement and comparable sealing performance to composite resin in coronal dentin cavities.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Dental Leakage · Calcium Silicate · Glass Ionomer Cements

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the microleakage of a calcium silicate–based material (Biodentine) with glass ionomer cement (GIC) and composite resin in standardized coronal dentin cavities in-vitro. Materials and methods: Sixty extracted human third molars were used. Standardized dentin cavities (4×2×2 mm) were prepared and randomly assigned to three groups (n=20 of each): Biodentine, GIC (Fuji IX), and composite resin (Clearfil SE Bond + Filtek Z250). Following restoration, all specimens were stored in distilled water for 24 hours and subjected to 3000 thermal cycles. Microleakage was assessed after 0.5% basic fuchsin dye penetration and scoring under a stereomicroscope. Data were analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Bonferroni post hoc tests (p 0.05). Conclusion: Biodentine demonstrated significantly lower microleakage compared with glass ionomer cement and comparable sealing performance to composite resin in coronal dentin cavities.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, koronal dentin kavitelerinde kalsiyum silikat esaslı bir materyal (Biodentine) ile cam iyonomer siman (GIC) ve kompozit rezin ile yapılan restorasyonların mikrosızıntı açısından değerlendirilmesi ve karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Altmış adet çekilmiş insan üçüncü molar dişi kullanıldı. Standartize dentin kaviteleri (4×2×2 mm) hazırlandı ve örnekler rastgele üç gruba ayrıldı (her biri için n=20): Biodentine, GIC (Fuji IX) ve kompozit rezin (Clearfil SE Bond + Filtek Z250). Restorasyonların ardından tüm örneklere 3000 termal döngü uygulandı. Mikrosızıntı, %0,5 bazik fuksin boya penetrasyonu yöntemiyle değerlendirildi ve stereomikroskop altında skorlandı. Veriler Kruskal–Wallis ve Bonferroni post hoc testleri ile analiz edildi (p 0,05). Sonuç: Biodentine, cam iyonomer simana kıyasla anlamlı derecede daha düşük mikrosızıntı göstermiş ve koronal dentin kavitelerinde kompozit rezin ile benzer sızdırmazlık performansı sergilemiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kuru, E., Eronat, N., Turkun, M., Çoğulu, D. (2026). Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage of Biodentine, Glass Ionomer Cement, and Composite Resin Used for Dentin Restoration: An In Vitro Study. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, Volume: 27 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.69601/meandrosmdj.1925907

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Auschill TM, Koch CA, Wolkewitz M, Hellwig E, Arweiler NB. Occurrence and causing stimuli of postoperative sensitivity in composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2009;34:3–10. https://doi.org/10.2341/08-7.
  2. Kidd EA. Microleakage: a review. J Dent. 1976;4:199–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(76)90048-8.
  3. Raskin A, Eschrich G, Dejou J, About I. In vitro microleakage of Biodentine as a dentin substitute compared to Fuji II LC in cervical lining restorations. J Adhes Dent. 2012;14:535–542. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a25690.
  4. Wiegand A, Buchalla W, Attin T. Review on fluoride-releasing restorative materials—fluoride release and uptake characteristics, antibacterial activity and influence on caries formation. Dent Mater. 2007;23:343–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.01.022.
  5. Ferracane JL, Cooper PR, Smith AJ. Can interaction of materials with the dentin-pulp complex contribute to dentin regeneration? Odontology. 2010;98:2–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-009-0116-5.
  6. Zhu K, Zheng L, Xing J, Chen S, Chen R, Ren L. Mechanical, antibacterial, biocompatible and microleakage evaluation of glass ionomer cement modified by nanohydroxyapatite/polyhexamethylene biguanide. Dent Mater J. 2022;41:197–208. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2021-096.
  7. Kuru E, Eronat N, Türkün M, et al. Comparison of remineralization ability of tricalcium silicate and glass ionomer cement on residual dentin: an in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2024;24:732. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04475-4.
  8. Jefferies SR. Bioactive and biomimetic restorative materials: a comprehensive review. Part I. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014;26:14–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12069.
  9. Dawood AE, Parashos P, Wong RHK, Reynolds EC, Manton DJ. Calcium silicate-based cements: composition, properties, and clinical applications. J Investig Clin Dent. 2017;8:e12195. https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12195.
  10. Koubi G, Colon P, Franquin JC, Hartmann A, Richard G, Faure MO, et al. Clinical evaluation of the performance and safety of a new dentine substitute, Biodentine, in the restoration of posterior teeth: a prospective study. Clin Oral Investig. 2013;17:243–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0701-9.
  11. Komabayashi T, Colmenar D, Cvach N, Bhat A, Primus C, Imai Y. Comprehensive review of current endodontic sealers. Dent Mater J. 2020;39:703–720. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2019-288.
  12. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
  13. Albeshti R, Shahid S. Evaluation of microleakage in Zirconomer: a zirconia-reinforced glass ionomer cement. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2018;52:97–104. https://doi.org/10.15644/asc52/2/2.
  14. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174.
  15. Atmeh AR, Chong EZ, Richard G, Festy F, Watson TF. Dentin-cement interfacial interaction: calcium silicates and polyalkenoates. J Dent Res. 2012;91:454–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034512443068.
  16. Bani M, Sungurtekin-Ekçi E, Odabaş ME. Efficacy of Biodentine as an apical plug in nonvital permanent teeth with open apices: an in vitro study. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:359275. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/359275.
  17. El-Khodary HM, Farsi DJ, Farsi NM, Zidan AZ. Sealing ability of four calcium-containing cements used for repairing furcal perforations in primary molars: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2015;16:733–739. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1749.
  18. Raju VG, Venumbaka NR, Mungara J, Vijayakumar P, Rajendran S, Elangovan A. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and microleakage of tricalcium silicate-based restorative material and radiopaque posterior glass ionomer restorative cement in primary and permanent teeth: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2014;32:304–310. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.140952.
  19. Ferracane JL. Resin composite—state of the art. Dent Mater. 2011;27:29–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.020.
  20. Malkondu Ö, Karapinar Kazandağ M, Kazazoğlu E. A review on Biodentine, a contemporary dentine replacement and repair material. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:160951. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/160951.
  21. Nowicka A, Lipski M, Parafiniuk M, Sporniak-Tutak K, Lichota D, Kosierkiewicz A, et al. Response of human dental pulp capped with Biodentine and mineral trioxide aggregate. J Endod. 2013;39:743–747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.01.005.
  22. Saber AM, El-Housseiny AA, Alamoudi NM. Atraumatic restorative treatment and interim therapeutic restoration: a review of the literature. Dent J (Basel). 2019;7:28. https://doi.org/10.3390/dj7010028.
  23. Duncan HF, Galler KM, Tomson PL, Simon S, El-Karim I, Kundzina R, et al. European Society of Endodontology position statement: management of deep caries and the exposed pulp. Int Endod J. 2019;52:923–934. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13128.
  24. Bani M, Aktaş N, Çınar Ç, Odabaş ME. The clinical and radiographic success of primary molar pulpotomy using Biodentine and mineral trioxide aggregate: a 24-month randomized clinical trial. Pediatr Dent. 2017;39:284–288.
  25. Awawdeh L, Al-Qudah A, Hamouri H, Chakra RJ. Outcomes of vital pulp therapy using mineral trioxide aggregate or Biodentine: a prospective randomized clinical trial. J Endod. 2018;44:1603–1609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2018.08.004.
  26. Martens LC, Cauwels RGEC, Van Acker JWG, Joshi KR, Hanet PN, Rajasekharan S. Biodentine as a temporary filling in deep carious lesions in permanent teeth: a prospective observational 33-month follow-up study. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2024;25:277–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40368-024-00869-8.
  27. Hayes M, da Mata C, Tada S, Cole M, McKenna G, Burke FM, Allen PF. Evaluation of Biodentine in the restoration of root caries: a randomized controlled trial. JDR Clin Trans Res. 2016;1:51–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/2380084416628474.
  28. Alani AH, Toh CG. Detection of microleakage around dental restorations: a review. Oper Dent. 1997;22:173–185.
  29. Nicholson JW. Maturation processes in glass-ionomer dental cements. Acta Biomater Odontol Scand. 2018;4:63–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/23337931.2018.1497492.
  30. Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ. Polymerization stress—is it clinically meaningful? Dent Mater. 2016;32:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.06.020.
  31. Talabani RM, Garib BT, Masaeli R. Bioactivity and physicochemical properties of three calcium silicate-based cements: an in vitro study. Biomed Res Int. 2020;2020:9576930. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/9576930.
  32. Dülger K, Koşar T. Comparison of three dentine replacement materials in terms of different characteristics. Aust Endod J. 2025;51:81–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/aej.12908.
  33. Akbulut MB, Mutlu ŞN, Soylu MA, Şimşek E. Interfacial characteristics of BIOfactor MTA and Biodentine with dentin. Microsc Res Tech. 2023;86:258–267. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.24267.
  34. Mustafa R, Alshali RZ, Silikas N. The effect of desiccation on water sorption, solubility and hygroscopic volumetric expansion of dentine replacement materials. Dent Mater. 2018;34:e205–e213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2018.05.012.
  35. Arthilakshmi, Vishnurekha C, Annamalai S, Baghkomeh PN, Sharmin DD. Effect of protective coating on microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in primary molars: an in vitro study. Indian J Dent Res. 2018;29:744–748. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_490_17.
  36. Camilleri J. Investigation of Biodentine as dentine replacement material. J Dent. 2013;41:600–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.05.003.
  37. Niranjan B, Shashikiran ND, Maran S, et al. A comparative microleakage evaluation of three different base materials in Class I cavity in deciduous molars in sandwich technique using dye penetration and dentin surface interface by scanning electron microscope. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2016;34:324–330. https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191410.
  38. Patel C, Patel M, Panchal M, Bhatt R, Patel F, Makwani D. Evaluation of microleakage and shear bond strength of two different calcium-based silicate indirect pulp-capping agents when restored with glass ionomer cement and composite resin restoration: a comparative in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024;17:1035–1040. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2887.
  39. Chaweewannakorn W, Karuna C, Kasemsook N, Kittithummaroj W, Chinajitphan N, Dhanesuan N, Youcharoen K. In vitro evaluation of microleakage in a tricalcium silicate-based cement matured for 12 min or 24 h and covered with glass ionomer cement or resin composite. J Oral Sci. 2026;68:93–98. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.25-0236.
  40. Gale MS, Darvell BW. Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental restorations. J Dent. 1999;27:89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(98)00037-2.
  41. Weerakoon AT, Cooper C, Meyers IA, Condon N, Sexton C, Thomson D, Ford PJ, Symons AL. Does dentine mineral change with anatomical location, microscopic site and patient age? J Struct Biol X. 2022;6:100060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yjsbx.2022.100060