Comparative Evaluation of Microleakage in Bioactive, Composite and Glass Ionomer Restorations for Class V Cavities: An In Vitro Study

Open Access

Abstract

Background: Marginal microleakage remains a clinical challenge in restorative dentistry, especially in Class V cavities, where bonding is compromised by limited enamel margins and dentin exposure. Poor marginal sealing can cause postoperative sensitivity, discoloration, secondary caries and restoration failure. Although resin composites and glass ionomer cements are commonly used, bioactive materials have been developed to improve sealing through ion release and remineralization; however, comparative evidence is limited. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the microleakage of four restorative materials in standardized Class V cavities. Methods & Materials: A total of 100 extracted human mandibular premolars were included in this study and randomly allocated into four groups (n = 25). Standardized Class V cavities were restored according to the manufacturer’s protocols. The specimens were subjected to thermocycling and dye penetration using 2% methylene blue. Microleakage was assessed using stereomicroscopy and a standardized scoring system. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25.0. Results: The bioactive restorative material demonstrated the lowest mean microleakage values and the highest proportion of specimens with no dye penetration. Flowable bulk-fill and universal composite resins exhibited comparable intermediate microleakage, whereas reinforced glass ionomer cement demonstrated significantly higher microleakage and a greater frequency of advanced penetration scores. Conclusion: Bioactive restorative materials exhibited superior marginal sealing in Class V cavities compared with conventional resin-based and reinforced glass ionomer restoratives, suggesting their potential clinical advantage for cervical restorations.