 |
Publisher: Peytchinski Publishing Ltd.
ISSN: 1312-773X (Online)
Issue: 2026, vol. 32, issue1
Subject Area: Dental Medicine
-
DOI: 10.5272/jimab.2026321.6755
Published online: 20 March 2026
Original article
J of IMAB. 2026 Jan-Mar;32(1):6755-6759
MICRO-CT ANALYSIS OF MICROLEAKAGE IN BULK-FILL COMPOSITE RESTORATIONS: CONVENTIONAL PLACEMENT VERSUS STAMP TECHNIQUE
Ralitsa Bogovska-Gigova
, Krasimir Hristov
,
Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria.
ABSTRACT:
Purpose: This study aimed to assess the microleakage in Class I bulk-fill composite by comparing the conventional bulk-fill technique versus the stamp technique, using micro-computed tomography.
Materials and Methods: Twenty-four caries-free permanent molars, extracted for orthodontic reasons, were prepared with standardized Class I occlusal cavities (4 mm deep, 5 mm mesiodistal, 4 mm buccolingual) and randomly assigned to two groups (n=12 each): Group 1 (conventional bulk-fill with Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill) and Group 2 (stamp technique with the same composite). Both groups followed the same adhesive protocol (37% phosphoric acid etching, Adhese Universal VivaPen, and light-curing at 1000 mW/cm²). Group 1 restorations were manually shaped and cured, with glycerin gel applied to eliminate the oxygen-inhibited layer, while Group 2 used a pre-restorative occlusal stamp for anatomy replication. Specimens underwent 1000 thermocycling cycles (5°C–55°C) to simulate aging, followed by immersion in a 50% silver nitrate solution for microleakage tracing. Micro-computed tomography analysis quantified silver nitrate penetration at the resin-tooth interface, and data were analyzed and compared. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test (α = 0.05) was used to compare the amount of penetrated tracer.
Results: Mean volume of penetrated tracer was 0.053 ± 0.031 for Group 1 and 0.057 ± 0.028 for Group 2, with no statistically significant difference (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Both techniques demonstrated comparable microleakage, suggesting that the stamp technique is a viable alternative for Class I restorations, offering efficient occlusal anatomy replication without compromising marginal integrity. Further in vivo studies are needed to validate clinical performance.
Keywords: Microleakage, Bulk-fill composite, Stamp technique, micro-CT, Marginal integrity,
- Download FULL TEXT /PDF 1118 KB/
Please cite this article as: Bogovska-Gigova R, Hristov K. Micro-CT Analysis of Microleakage in Bulk-Fill Composite Restorations: Conventional Placement versus Stamp Technique. J of IMAB. 2026 Jan-Mar;32(1):6755-6759. [Crossref - 10.5272/jimab.2026321.6755]
Correspondence to: Krasimir Hristov, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University – Sofia; 1, Georgi Sofiisky str., Sofia, Bulgaria; E-mail: k.christov@fdm.mu-sofia.bg
REFERENCES:
1. Bilgrami A, Alam MK, Qazi FUR, Maqsood A, Basha S, Ahmed N, et al. An In-Vitro Evaluation of Microleakage in Resin-Based Restorative Materials at Different Time Intervals. Polymers (Basel). 2022 Jan 24;14(3):466. [Crossref]
2. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Microleakage of adhesive restorative materials. Am J Dent. 2001 Jun;14(3):170-6. [PubMed]
3. Farmer SN, Ludlow SW, Donaldson ME, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A. Microleakage of composite and two types of glass ionomer restorations with saliva contamination at different steps. Pediatr Dent. 2014 Jan-Feb;36(1):14-7. [PubMed]
4. Krifka S, Federlin M, Hiller KA, Schmalz G. Microleakage of silorane- and methacrylate-based class V composite restorations. Clin Oral Investig. 2012 Aug;16(4):1117-24. [PubMed]
5. Carrera CA, Lan C, Escobar-Sanabria D, Li Y, Rudney J, Aparicio C, et al. The use of micro-CT with image segmentation to quantify leakage in dental restorations. Dent Mater. 2015 Apr;31(4):382-90. [Crossref]
6. Rizzante FAP, Sedky RAF, Furuse AY, Teich S, Ishikiriama SK, Mendonзa G. Validation of a method of quantifying 3D leakage in dental restorations. J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Jun;123(6):839-844. [PubMed]
7. Rengo C, Goracci C, Ametrano G, Chieffi N, Spagnuolo G, Rengo S, et al. Marginal Leakage of Class V Composite Restorations Assessed Using Microcomputed Tomography and Scanning Electron Microscope. Oper Dent. 2015 Jul-Aug;40(4):440-8. [PubMed]
8. Bogovska-Gigova R, Hristov Kr. Microleakage Assessment of Bulk-Fill Composites in Primary Molars Using Micro-CT Analysis. MedInform. 2025; 12(3):2166-2175. [Crossref]
9. Dennison JB, Sarrett DC. Prediction and diagnosis of clinical outcomes affecting restoration margins. J Oral Rehabil. 2012 Apr;39(4):301-18. [PubMed]
10. Bud MG, Pop RC, Pricope R, Mesaros A, Voina A, Delean A, et al. Comparative microleakage outcomes of different techniques used for creating the occlusal anatomy in occlusal direct restorations using the dental operating microscope. Clin Exp Dent Res. 2022 Dec;8(6):1623-1629. [PubMed]
11. García Marí L, Climent Gil A, Llena Puy C. In vitro evaluation of microleakage in Class II composite restorations: High-viscosity bulk-fill vs conventional composites. Dent Mater J. 2019 Oct 2;38(5):721-727. [PubMed]
12. Cidreira Boaro LC, Pereira Lopes D, de Souza ASC, Lie Nakano E, Ayala Perez MD, Pfeifer CS, et al. Clinical performance and chemical-physical properties of bulk fill composites resin -a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dent Mater. 2019 Oct;35(10):e249-e264. [PubMed ]
13. Dutra NMS, Baroudi K, Silva ASF, Laxe LAC, da Silva Concilio LR, Tribst JPM, et al. Effect of the Combination of Restorative Material and the Etching Protocol in Enamel Microleakage in Class II Cavities after Thermocycling. BioMed Res Int. 2023 Feb 11;2023:1354738. [Crossref]
14. Martinez-Sabio L, Penate L, Arregui M, Veloso Duran A, Blanco JR, Guinot F. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites-An In Vitro Study. Polymers (Basel). 2023 Jun 27;15(13):2840. [PubMed]
15. Battancs E, Sáry T, Molnár J, Braunitzer G, Skolnikovics M, Schindler Á, et al. Fracture Resistance and Microleakage around Direct Restorations in High C-Factor Cavities. Polymers (Basel). 2022 Aug 25;14(17):3463. [PubMed]
16. Gigova R, Hristov K. Micro-Computed Tomography Assessment of Voids and Volume Changes in Bulk-Fill Restoration with Stamp Technique. Materials. 2025 Aug;18(17):4027. [Crossref]
17. Klein C, von Ohle C, Wolff D, Meller C. A quantitative assessment of silicone and PTFE-based stamp techniques for restoring occlusal anatomy using resin-based composites. Clin Oral Investig. 2022 Jan;26(1):207-215. [PubMed]
18. Zotti F, Vincenzi S, Zangani A, Bernardi P, Sbarbati A. Stamp Technique: An Explorative SEM Analysis. Dent J. 2023 Mar;11(3):77. [Crossref]
19. Aljamhan AS, Alhazzaa SA, Albakr AH, Habib SR, Zafar MS. Comparing the Ability of Various Resin-Based Composites and Techniques to Seal Margins in Class-II Cavities. Polymers (Basel). 2021 Aug 30;13(17):2921. [PubMed]
Received: 12 September 2025
Published online: 20 March 2026