European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 15–21 | Cite as

Nanoleakage related to bond strength in RM-GIC and adhesive restorations

  • M. Marquezan
  • J. A. SkupienEmail author
  • B. L. da Silveira
  • A. L. Ciamponi


AIM: This was to investigate the nanoleakage of Resin Modified Glass Ionomer Cement (RMGIC) and composite resin (CR) restorations in sound and caries-affected primary dentine, submitted to load cycling and cariogenic challenge in vitro. METHOD: Occlusal cavities were prepared in 60 sound exfoliated primary second molars and 30 specimens were subjected to chemical induction of artificial caries lesions and the others were restored without caries induction. All prepared teeth were divided into 2 groups according to restorative materials. From each dentine condition 5 restored teeth and restorative material were subjected to microtensile bond strength and nanoleakage tests immediately or after load-cycling or submitted to the pH-cycling procedure before testing. RESULTS: The adhesive presented bigger areas of silver leakage at the interfaces on caries-affected dentine (2.46±0.47)mm2 than sound dentine (0.90±0.19)mm2. RMGIC nanoleakage was not influenced by the sound (1.75±0.11)mm2or caries-affected (2.08±0.39) condition of the substrate. A significant moderate inverse correlation was revealed between the bond strength and silver leakage area at the interface, (r= −0.55, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nanoleakage is greater in caries-affected primary teeth dentine than sound dentine in adhesive restorations although at the interfaces of RMGIC does not differ. As nanoleakage increases, bond strength decreases significantly.

k]Key words

nanoleakage primary dentine adhesion 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, et al. Dental adhesion review: ageing and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater 2008; 24:90–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carrilho MR, Geraldeli S, Tay FR, et al. In vivo preservation of the hybrid layer by chlorhexidine. J Dent Res 2007; 86:529–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Munck J, Van Landuyt K, Peumans M, et al. A critical review of the durability of adhesion to tooth tissue: methods and results. J Dent Res 2005; 84:118–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ding PG, Wolff D, Pioch T, Staehle HJ, Dannewitz B. Relationship between microtensile bond strength and nanoleakage at the composite-dentin interface. Dent Mater 2009; 25:135–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Erhardt MC, Rodrigues JA, Valentino TA, Ritter AV, Pimenta LA. In vitro microTBS of one-bottle adhesive systems: Sound versus artificially-created caries-affected dentin. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008 Jul; 86:181–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Kaga M, et al. In vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds in humans over 1 to 3 years. J Dent Res 2000; 79:1385–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hashimoto M, De Munck J, Ito S, et al. In vitro effect of nanoleakage expression on resin-dentin bond strengths analyzed by microtensile bond test, SEM/EDX and TEM. Biomaterials 2004; 25:5565–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hebling J, Pashley DH, Tjaderhane L, Tay FR. Chlorhexidine Arrests Subclinical Degradation of Dentin Hybrid Layers in vivo. J Dent Res 2005; 84:741–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Li H, Burrow MF, Tyas MJ. The effect of load cycling on the nanoleakage of dentin bonding systems. Dent Mater 2002; 18:111–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Mendes FM, Nicolau J. Utilization of laser fluorescence to monitor caries lesions development in primary teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 2004; 71:139–42.Google Scholar
  11. Navarra CO, Cadenaro M, Codan B, et al. Degree of conversion and interfacial nanoleakage expression of three one-step self-etch adhesives. Eur J Oral Sci 2009; 117:463–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Neelakantan P, Sanjeev K, Rao CV. Ultramorphological characterization of the resin dentin interface—an in vitro analysis of nanoleakage patterns of dentin adhesives. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2009; 33:223–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Okuda M, Pereira PN, Nakajima M, Tagami J, Pashley DH. Long-term durability of resin dentin interface: nanoleakage vs. microtensile bond strength. Oper Dent 2002; 27:289–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Osorio R, Ceballos L, Tay FR, Cabrerizo-Vilchez MA, Toledano M. Effect of sodium hypochlorite on dentin bonding with a polyalkenoic acid-containing adhesive system. J Biomed Mater Res 2002; 60:316–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pashley DH, Tay FR, Yiu C, et al. Collagen degradation by host-derived enzymes during ageing. J Dent Res 2004; 83:216–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pereira PN, Sano H, Ogata M, et al. Effect of region and dentin perfusion on bond strengths of resin-modified glass ionomer cements. J Dent 2000; 28:347–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Reis AF, Arrais CA, Novaes PD, et al. Ultramorphological analysis of resin-dentin interfaces produced with water-based single-step and two-step adhesives: nanoleakage expression. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Bio-mater 2004; 71:90–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Reis A, Grande RH, Oliveira GM, Lopes GC, Loguercio AD. A 2-year evaluation of moisture on microtensile bond strength and nanoleakage. Dent Mater 2007a; 23:862–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Reis AF, Giannini M, Pereira PN. Long-term TEM analysis of the nanoleakage patterns in resin-dentin interfaces produced by different bonding strategies. Dent Mater 2007b; 23:1164–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ricci HA, Sanabe ME, de Souza Costa CA, Pashley DH, Hebling J. Chlorhexidine increases the longevity of in vivo resin-dentin bonds. Eur J Oral Sci. 2010;118:411–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rocha RO, Soares FZ, Rodrigues Filho LE, Rodrigues CR. Influence of ageing treatments on microtensile bond strength of adhesive systems to primary dentin. ASDC J Dent Child 2007; 74:109–12.Google Scholar
  22. Sano H, Shono T, Takatsu T, Hosoda H. Microporous dentin zone beneath resin-impregnated layer. Oper Dent 1994; 19:59–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Sano H, Takatsu T, Ciucchi B, Horner JA, Matthews WG, et al. Nanoleakage: leakage within the hybrid layer. Oper Dent 1995; 20:18–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Tay FR, Hashimoto M, Pashley DH, et al. Ageing affects two modes of nanoleakage expression in bonded dentin. J Dent Res 2003; 82:537–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tay FR, Pashley DH, Yoshiyama M. Two modes of nanoleakage expression in single-step adhesives. J Dent Res 2002a; 81:472–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tay FR, Pashley DH, Suh BI, Carvalho RM, Itthagarun A. Single-step adhesives are permeable membranes. J Dent 2002b; 30:371–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tay FR, King NM, Chan KM, Pashley DH. How can nanoleakage occur in self-etching adhesive systems that demineralize and infiltrate simultaneously? J Adhes Dent 2002c; 4:255–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Marquezan
    • 1
  • J. A. Skupien
    • 1
    Email author
  • B. L. da Silveira
    • 1
  • A. L. Ciamponi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Paediatric DentistryUniversity of São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations