Comparative evaluation of microleakage between bulk esthetic materials versus resinmodified glass ionomer to restore Class II cavities in Primary Molars

Aim: The aim of the study was to assess the microleakage of one highviscosity conventional glass ionomer cement (GIC) and a bulkfill composite resin, in comparison to a resinmodified GIC in Class II restorations in primary molars. Materials and Method: Standardized Class II slot cavity preparations were prepared in exfoliating primary molars. Teeth were restored using one of the three materials tested (n = 10): SonicFill bulkfill composite resin (SF), EQUIA Fil conventional reinforced GIC (EQF), and Vitremer resinreinforced GIC (VT). The restorations were then subjected to thermocycling procedure (×2000 5°C-55°C 10 s/min) and soaked in 1% neutralized fuchsin solution (pH: 7.4) for 24 h at 37°C. Teeth were sectioned longitudinally in a mesiodistal direction under continuous cooling into three slabs of 1 mm thickness and studied under a stereomicroscope for dye penetration. Statistical Analysis: Data were evaluated by oneway analysis of variance and the Tukey's multiple comparison test employing 95% (i= 0.05). Results: EQF and SF showed significantly lower microleakage scores and percentage of dye penetration (%RL) when compared to VT resinreinforced GIC (P < 0.001). Conclusion: SF and EQF produced the minimum microleakage when compared to VT in Class II restorations on primary molars. Fewer application procedures and reduction in treatment time in SF and EQF systems proved advantageous in pediatric dentistry.