Evaluation in term of microleakage of five different bulk fill restorative materials which are polymerised BY TWO different light devices

Aim: The aim of this in-vitro study is to evaluate in term of microleakage of five different bulk fill restorative materials which are polymerised by two different light devices. Matherials and Method: 100 non carious and non restorated new extracted human molar teeth, which are extracted with periodontal and orthodontic indication, were used in our study.Teeth were examined one by one carefully in order to detect they don't have caries,fracture,crack and previous restoration.And then all soft tissues were moved away with a scaler and all surfaces were cleaned with pumice and polishing plastic.The teeth were kept in distelLED water at room temperature untill the study is performed. Standart class V cavities were prepared on buccal surface of all teeth with cylinderique diamond bur with water irrigation.Cavities were prepared in, 3 mm mesio-distal,2 mm occlusal-gingival, 2mm dept, dimensions.Cavity lines were widened 1mm below of enamel sement junction.And then the teeth were divided in to 2 LED light device groups randomly.Subsequently,these two groups were divided in to 5 different bulk-fill resin composite materials subgroups.All subgroups were presented from 10 teeth.Group 1 was presented LED light device with SDR, X-tra fil, Beautifil Bulk, Venus Bulk Fill, Filtek Bulk Fill restorative materials.Group 2 was presented Valo LED light device with SDR, X-tra fil, Beautifil Bulk, Venus Bulk Fill, Filtek Bulk Fill restorative materials.Restorations were completed due to the intructions of producers.Finishing and polishing were done with diamond content polishing plastics ( CLEARFIL Twist Dia, Kuraray Europe GmbH,Germany) 24 hours later. Subsequently, all samples were thermal cycLED1500 times in 5 ± 2 ºC and 55 ± 2 ºC for 30 seconds.And then apical foramens of all teeth were seaLED with composite resin and the samples were coated with acid resistant nail polish 1 mm away from the restoration borders.All samples were kept in %0,5 basic fuchsine paint solution for 24 hours.And then all samples were washed with water in order to move away excess paint sloution.After, the teeth were splitted at the middle of the restorations buccal-lingual/palatinal diretion and 200 samples were obtained from 100 teeth.Occlusal and gingival microleakage degrees of sectional surfaces were observed by an individual researcher under stereoptic microscope with x57 magnify and the scores were recorded.Add to this, one tooth from each groups was selected randomly and adaptation between resin material and cavity wall was observed under SEM with various magnifications and was photographed.Finally,results were statistically evaluated by ANOVA and Student's t tests. Results: No statistically significant difference was found at the occlusal lines among polymerisation of SDR, X-tra fil, Beautifil Bulk, Filtek Bulk Fill, Venus Bulk Fill by Optima-10 LED device and Valo LED device (p>0,05).During the evaluation of gingival microleakage scores,no difference was found among Beautifil, Filtek, X-tra fil with both optima and valo LED but SDR and Venus has presented more microleakage statistically significant (p<0.05).During the comparison of light devices, there was no difference among all composites at the occlusal lines,and at the gingival lines,Valo LED cured composites have presented less microleakage than optimaLED cured composites. Conclusion: Due to the our study's results,Valo LED cured restorations have presented better results than Optima LED cured restorations.Among the composites, Beautifil, Filtek, X-tra fil have presented beter scores than SDR and Venus Bulk Fill in terms of microleakage.