Microleakage assessment of one- and two-step self-etch adhesive systems with the low shrinkage composites

Background and aim: different studies evaluating one-step self-etch (se) adhesive systems show contradictoryfindings, so the aim of this study was to compare the microleakage of one-step se adhesive systems and clearfil sebond (csb) (that serves as the “gold-standard” se adhesive) with low shrinkage composites.methods: in this in vitro study, class v cavities with the occlusal margin in enamel and cervical margin in cementumwere prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces of 36 human premolars and molars (72 cavities). the enamel surfacesof the cavities were etched with 37% phosphoric acid and then the specimens were divided into six groups of 6(12 cavities) and the cavities were restored according bellow: group 1 (kalore-gc + g-bond), group 2 (grandio+ futurabond nr), group 3 (aelite ls posterior + all bond se), group 4 (kalore-gc + csb), group 5 (grandio+ csb), and group 6 (aelite ls posterior + csb). all the specimens were thermocycled for 2000 cycles (5-55 °c) andthen placed in 0.5% basic fuchsine dye for 24 hours at 37 °c and finally sectioned and observed under thestereomicroscope. data were analyzed using kruskal-wallis, mann-whitney, and wilcoxon tests at a p < 0.050 level ofsignificance.results: in comparison between occlusal and gingival margins in each group, microleakage in occlusal margins wassignificantly less than the gingival margins (except kalore + csb) (p > 0.050). there were no significant differences inmicroleakage among two-step and one-step se adhesive systems on both the occlusal and gingival margins.conclusion: according to this study, two-step se adhesive system (csb) did not provide better marginal seal than theone-step se adhesive systems.