Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the marginal adaptation of bulk-fill resin composites with different viscosities (paste-like and flowable) in Class II restorations using micro-CT imaging. Methods: Forty extracted human molars were used. Mesial and distal Class II box cavities (approximately 3 mm x 3 mm x 4 mm) were prepared for each tooth, with cavity floors located 1 mm below the enamel-cementum junction. Following adhesive application, teeth were restored using eight different groups: Group XB: X-tra Base Bulk-fill Flowable (VOCO), Group XF: X-tra Fill Bulk-fill (VOCO), Group FB: Filtek Bulk-fill Posterior (3 M ESPE), Group FF: Filtek Bulk-fill Flowable (3 M ESPE), Group BB: Beautifil-Bulk (SHOFU), Group BF: Beautifil-Bulk Flowable (SHOFU), and Group CO: “as a control group”, Clearfil Majesty Posterior (KURARAY) and Group CF: “as a control group”, Clearfil Majesty Flow + Clearfil Majesty Posterior (KURARAY). The restored teeth underwent an aging protocol involving 1000 cycles in a water bath fluctuating between 5 ± 1.0 °C and 55 ± 1.0 °C. Post-aging, teeth were immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution for 24 h and then in a film developer solution for 8 h. Microleakage analysis was performed using micro-CT, evaluated with 3D Slicer software. A two-way ANOVA was employed for statistical analysis. Results: Two-way ANOVA results indicated significant effects of both viscosity (p < 0.0001) and composite type (p < 0.0001) on marginal adaptation. Viscosity analysis (comparing flowable and paste-like) revealed no significant differences in the FB-FF, XB-XF and BB-BF groups but significant differences in the and CO-CF group, with flowable type exhibiting less microleakage than paste-like type. Conclusions: The study suggests that while the viscosity of bulk-fill composites did not significantly affect marginal adaptation, the brand of bulk-fill composite did influence it.
Self-adhesive flowable resin composites have been developed to simplify restorative procedures by eliminating separate adhesive application; however, their gingival sealing to dentin remains a concern. This study assessed the gingival marginal sealing of resin composites by measuring silver nitrate solution (AgNO3) penetration using micro-computed tomography (µCT). Materials and Methods: Seventy-five human third molars with 150 standardized cavities were allocated into 15 experimental groups based on three surface pretreatments (no pretreatment, sodium hypochlorite solution [NaOCl], and a hypochlorous acid-containing aqueous solution [HCS]) and five restorative materials: three self-adhesive flowable composites (Fusio Self-Adhesive, Vertise Flow, and Nova Compo SF) and two conventional composites (Clearfil Majesty Posterior and Clearfil Majesty Flow). Following thermal cycling, microleakage was quantified by measuring silver nitrate penetration along the gingival floor of the restorations using µCT and statistically analyzed. Results: HCS significantly reduced silver nitrate penetration in all self-adhesive composites (p < 0.05), while NaOCl significantly reduced silver nitrate penetration only in the 10-MDP-containing Nova Compo SF (p < 0.05). Conventional composites bonded with a self-etch adhesive exhibited significantly lower microleakage than self-adhesive materials (p < 0.05). Conclusions: HCS improved the gingival marginal sealing of self-adhesive flowable composites to dentin, whereas the effect of NaOCl was material-dependent. Conventional resin composites used with a self-etch adhesive demonstrated superior gingival marginal sealing compared with self-adhesive flowable composites.
25 March 2026 in European Annals of Dental Sciences
PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the YOLOv11 deep learning–based object detection model in detecting dental restorations on digital panoramic radiographs.Materials and MethodsA total of 320 panoramic radiographs obtained from adult patients were included in this study. Four types of dental restorations—amalgam, composite, crown, and bridge—were manually annotated and used for model training and evaluation. The dataset was divided into training and testing subsets at a ratio of 75% and 25%, respectively. A validation subset was derived from the training data. Model performance was assessed using precision, recall, F1-score, and mean Average Precision (mAP) metrics.ResultsThe YOLOv11 model achieved an overall precision of 0.663, recall of 0.665, and F1-score of 0.663 across all restoration categories. The mAP@50 value was 0.671, while the mAP@50–95 value was 0.432, indicating variations in detection performance across different Intersection over Union thresholds. Differences in detection performance were observed among the various types of dental restorations.ConclusionThe findings indicate that YOLOv11 demonstrates measurable potential as an automated support tool for detecting dental restorations on panoramic radiographs; however, the achieved performance remains lower than that reported in several previous studies. Successful clinical integration of such AI-assisted systems requires further optimization and validation using larger and more heterogeneous datasets to enhance generalizability and clinical applicability.
Microleakage at the tooth–restoration interface is a primary cause of restoration failure in Class V cavities. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the long-term microleakage performance of three bioactive restorative materials — including one applied with and without an adhesive system — and a conventional universal composite resin. Specifically, we investigated whether bioactive materials maintain marginal sealing stability comparable to conventional composite resin over 1-year and 5-year simulated aging periods assessed by micro-computed tomography. Ninety sound human upper molars received standardized Class V cavities and were restored with Cention N (alkasite restorative, with and without adhesive), Activa Bioactive Restorative (bioactive ionic resin-based restorative), GC Equia Forte HT (glass hybrid restorative), or G-aenial A’Chord (nanohybrid composite resin, control). Specimens were subjected to 10,000 or 50,000 thermocycles corresponding to 1-year and 5-year simulated aging. Silver nitrate-enhanced micro-computed tomography was used for three-dimensional volumetric quantification of microleakage. Data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test with Dunn’s post hoc test and Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction. No significant differences were observed among groups after 1-year simulated aging. After 5-year simulated aging, GC Equia Forte HT exhibited significantly greater microleakage compared to all other materials and showed a significant increase relative to its own 1-year values. All remaining materials maintained stable microleakage volumes throughout the observation period. These findings indicate that the bioactive resin-based materials and the conventional composite maintained adequate marginal sealing throughout the observation period, whereas GC Equia Forte HT showed compromised marginal seal after extended aging. Bioactive resin-based materials demonstrated long-term marginal sealing stability comparable to conventional composite resin, whereas the glass-hybrid ionomer system showed progressive interfacial deterioration under prolonged thermocycling. The long-term sealing stability of bioactive resin-based restorative materials supports their use in Class V cavities, particularly in high-caries-risk patients who may benefit from ion-releasing remineralization capacity. Glass-hybrid ionomer systems such as GC Equia Forte HT may require closer clinical follow-up when used in long-term Class V restorations, and further clinical studies are warranted before definitive recommendations regarding their suitability for this indication can be made.