Dallı, MehmetBahsi, EmrullahŞahbaz, Caferİnce, BayramAkkus, ZekiErcan, ErtuğrulAtılgan, S. Serhat2020-06-252020-06-252010Dalli, M., Bahsi, E., Sahbaz, C., Ince, B., Akkus, Z., Ercan, E., & Atilgan, S. S. (2010). A Comparison of Microleakage Scores of Five Different Types of Composite Resins. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 24(4), 2122–2126. https://doi.org/10.2478/V10133-010-0072-91310-28181314-3530https://doi.org/10.2478/V10133-010-0072-9https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/4639ERCAN, Ertugrul/0000-0002-4753-6553This study aimed to perform a comparative assessment of microleakage in Class V cavities among five different composite resins For this purpose 100 fresh caries-free human permanent molars were randomly assigned to one of five groups (n=20) Clearfil Majesty Esthetic + Clearfil S3 Bond (Group I) TPH Spectrum + Xeno V (Group II) Gradia Direct Anterior + G Bond (GC) (Group III) Premise + Optibond All in One (Group IV) and Charisma + iBond (Group V) were applied and polymerized under LED Specimens were varnished immersed in 0 5% methylene and sectioned bucco-palatinally/lingually and microleakage scores were determined Gingival and occlusal microleakage scores among groups were statistically significant (p < 0 05) (p=0 043 p=0 005) Occlusal microleakage scores for Clearfil Majesty Esthetic and Premise were lower than in the other groups Charisma had the highest microleakage scores with no difference among the other groups (p > 0 05) In conclusion occlusal and gingival microleakage scores were satisfactory except for Charismaeninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessmicroleakagedifferent composite resinsself-etching adhesive systemsmethylene bluecervical lesionArticle2442122212610.2478/V10133-010-0072-92-s2.0-78649789313Q3WOS:000284717900015Q4