Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Evaluation of microleakage and push-out bond strength of various composite resins for sealing the screw-access channel in implant-supported restorations


      Statement of problem

      Microleakage and loss of the composite resin sealing the screw-access channel are frequent complications of screw-retained implant-supported prostheses. How the screw-access channel should be best restored to reduce such complications is unclear.


      The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microleakage and bond strength of 3 types of composite resins (flowable, packable, and bulk-fill) with or without a bonding agent treatment to seal the screw-access channel of 2 types of restorative materials (zirconia and Co-Cr alloy) with or without thermocycling.

      Material and methods

      In total, 240 yttria-stabilized tetragonal zirconia polycrystal (Y-TZP) specimens (IPS e.max ZirCAD) and 240 Co-Cr alloy (Vera PDS) specimens were prepared with a Ø3×3-mm cylindrical cavity at the center to simulate the screw-access channel. Three types of composite resins (flowable, packable, and bulk-fill resin) (Filtek Z350 XT Flowable Restorative, Filtek Z350 XT Universal Restorative, and Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative) were applied to restore the access channel of the zirconia and Co-Cr specimens with or without a bonding agent (Single Bond Universal Adhesive). Microleakage and push-out bond strength were determined and compared by dividing the specimens into experimental groups with or without thermocycling (1000 times with 30 seconds at 5 ±2 °C and 55 ±2 °C). The results were analyzed by using a 1-way ANOVA and 4-way ANOVA. Adjustment for multiple comparisons was made with the Tukey Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test.


      The specimens subjected to thermocycling showed a lower bond strength (P<.001) and higher microleakage (P<.001) than specimens stored in a constant-temperature water bath. Specimens treated with bonding agents showed a higher bond strength (P<.001) and lower microleakage (P<.001) than specimens not treated with a bonding agent. Higher bond strengths were observed in the order of bulk-fill resin, packable resin, and flowable resin (P<.001). Packable resin showed higher microleakage than flowable resin and bulk-fill resin (P<.05). No significant difference in microleakage was found between the flowable resin and bulk-fill resin (P>.05).


      Higher bond strengths were observed in the order of bulk-fill resin, packable resin, and flowable resin. Less microleakage was observed in the flowable resin and bulk-fill resin than in the packable composite resin. Bonding agent treatment was effective in increasing bond strength and decreasing microleakage. Zirconia and Co-Cr showed a bond strength similar to that of composite resins, but zirconia showed higher microleakage than Co-Cr. Restoring the screw-access channel with the bulk-fill resin should increase bond strength and reduce microleakage.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Thalji G.
        • Bryington M.
        • De Kok I.J.
        • Cooper L.F.
        Prosthodontic management of implant therapy.
        Dent Clin North Am. 2014; 58: 207-225
        • Chee W.
        • Felton D.A.
        • Johnson P.F.
        • Sullivan D.Y.
        Cemented versus screw-retained implant prosthesis: which is better?.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 137-141
        • Ma S.
        • Fenton A.
        Screw-versus cement-retained implant prostheses: a systematic review of prosthodontic maintenance and complications.
        Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28: 127-145
        • Lindquist L.W.
        • Carlsson G.E.
        • Jemt T.
        A prospective 15-year follow-up study of mandibular fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants. Clinical results and marginal bone loss.
        Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996; 7: 329-336
        • Friberg B.
        • Gröndahl K.
        • Lekholm U.
        • Brånemark P.I.
        Long-term follow-up of severely atrophic edentulous mandibles reconstructed with short Branemark implants.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2000; 2: 184-189
        • Papaspyridakos P.
        • Mokti M.
        • Chen C.J.
        • Benic G.I.
        • Gallucci G.O.
        • Chronopoulos V.
        Implant and prosthodontic survival rates with implant fixed complete dental prostheses in the edentulous mandible after at least 5 years: a systematic review.
        Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2014; 16: 705-717
        • Gross M.
        • Abramovich I.
        • Weiss E.I.
        Microleakage at the abutment-implant interface of osseointegrated implants: a comparative study.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 94-100
        • Broggini N.
        • McManus L.M.
        • Hermann J.S.
        • Medina R.U.
        • Oates T.W.
        • Schenk R.K.
        • et al.
        Persistent acute inflammation at the implant-abutment interface.
        J Dent Res. 2003; 82: 232-237
        • Hermann J.S.
        • Schoolfield J.D.
        • Schenk R.K.
        • Buser D.
        • Cochran D.L.
        Influence of the size of the microgap on crestal bone changes around titanium implants. A histometric evaluation of unloaded non-submerged implants in the canine mandible.
        J Periodontol. 2001; 72: 1372-1383
        • Tarica D.Y.
        • Alvarado V.M.
        • Truong S.T.
        Survey of United States dental schools on cementation protocols for implant crown restorations.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 103: 68-79
        • Park S.D.
        • Lee Y.
        • Kim Y.L.
        • Yu S.H.
        • Bae J.M.
        • Cho H.W.
        Microleakage of different sealing materials in access holes of internal connection implant systems.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2012; 108: 173-180
        • Tribst J.P.M.
        • Dal Piva A.M.D.O.
        • Gonçalves N.I.Ê.
        • Borges A.L.S.
        • Bottino M.A.
        • Kleverlaan C.J.
        Polymerization shrinkage and push-out bond strength of different composite resins for sealing the screw-access hole on implant-supported crowns.
        J Adhes Dent. 2020; 22: 523-530
        • Alshehri M.
        • Albaqiah H.
        Antimicrobial efficacy of materials used for sealing the implant abutment screw hole: an in vitro evaluation.
        Implant Dent. 2017; 26: 911-914
        • Taylor R.C.
        • Ghoneim A.S.
        • McGlumphy E.A.
        An esthetic technique to fill screw-retained fixed prostheses.
        J Oral Implantol. 2004; 30: 384-385
        • Tanimura R.
        • Suzuki S.
        Comparison of access-hole filling materials for screw retained implant prostheses: 12-month in vivo study.
        Int J Implant Dent. 2017; 3: 19
        • Jafarpour D.
        • Ferooz R.
        • Ferooz M.
        • Bagheri R.
        Physical and mechanical properties of bulk-fill, conventional, and flowable resin composites stored dry and wet.
        Int J Dent. 2022; 20227946239
        • Bayne S.C.
        • Thompson J.Y.
        • Swift Jr., E.J.
        • Stamatiades P.
        • Wilkerson M.
        A characterization of first-generation flowable composites.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 1998; 129: 567-577
        • Payne J.H.
        The marginal seal of class II restorations: flowable composite resin compared to injectable glass ionomer.
        J Clin Pediatr Dent. 1999; 23: 123-130
        • Attar N.
        • Turgut M.D.
        • Güngör H.C.
        The effect of flowable resin composites as gingival increments on the microleakage of posterior resin composites.
        Oper Dent. 2004; 29: 162-167
        • Mitra S.B.
        • Wu D.
        • Holmes B.N.
        An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134: 1382-1390
        • Moszner N.
        • Klapdohr S.
        Nanotechnology for dental composites.
        Int J Nanotechnol. 2004; 1: 130-156
        • Correia A.M.O.
        • Tribst J.P.M.
        • Matos F.S.
        • Platt J.A.
        • Caneppele T.M.F.
        • Borges A.L.S.
        Polymerization shrinkage stresses in different restorative techniques for non-carious cervical lesions.
        J Dent. 2018; 76: 68-74
        • Chesterman J.
        • Jowett A.
        • Gallacher A.
        • Nixon P.
        Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review.
        Br Dent J. 2017; 222: 337-344
        • de Lacerda L.R.
        • Bossardi M.
        • Mitterhofer W.J.S.
        • de Carvalho F.G.
        • Carlo H.L.
        • Piva E.
        • et al.
        New generation bulk-fill resin composites: effects on mechanical strength and fracture reliability.
        J Mech Behav Biomed. 2019; 96: 214-218
        • Haugen H.J.
        • Marovic D.
        • Par M.
        • Thieu M.K.L.
        • Reseland J.E.
        • Johnsen G.F.
        Bulk fill composites have similar performance to conventional dental composites.
        Int J Mol Sci. 2020; 21: 5136
        • Correia A.M.O.
        • Andrade M.R.
        • Tribst J.P.M.
        • Borges A.L.S.
        • Caneppele T.M.F.
        Influence of bulk-fill restoration on polymerization shrinkage stress and marginal gap formation in class V restorations.
        Oper Dent. 2020; 45: E207-E216
        • Fronza B.M.
        • Ayres A.
        • Pacheco R.R.
        • Rueggeberg F.A.
        • Dias C.
        • Giannini M.
        Characterization of inorganic filler content, mechanical properties, and light transmission of bulk-fill resin composites.
        Oper Dent. 2017; 42: 445-455
        • El-Safty S.
        • Akhtar R.
        • Silikas N.
        • Watts D.C.
        Nanomechanical properties of dental resin-composites.
        Dent Mater. 2012; 28: 1292-1300
        • Ilie N.
        • Bucuta S.
        • Draenert M.
        Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance.
        Oper Dent. 2013; 38: 618-625
        • Schoenbaum T.R.
        • Wadhwani C.
        • Stevenson R.G.
        Covering the implant prosthesis screw access hole: a biological approach to material selection and technique.
        J Oral Implantol. 2017; 43: 39-44
        • Matinlinna J.P.
        • Lung C.Y.K.
        • Tsoi J.K.H.
        Silane adhesion mechanism in dental applications and surface treatments: a review.
        Dent Mater. 2018; 34: 13-28
        • Alex G.
        Universal adhesives: the next evolution in adhesive dentistry?.
        Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2015; 36: 15-26
        • Hass V.
        • Abuna G.
        • Pinheiro Feitosa V.
        • Martini E.C.
        • Sinhoreti M.A.
        • Carvalho R.F.
        • et al.
        Self-etching enamel bonding using acidic functional monomers with different-length carbon chains and hydrophilicity.
        J Adhes Dent. 2017; 19: 497-505
        • Carrilho E.
        • Cardoso M.
        • Marques Ferreira M.
        • Marto C.M.
        • Paula A.
        • Coelho A.S.
        10-MDP based dental adhesives: adhesive interface characterization and adhesive stability-a systematic review.
        Materials (Basel). 2019; 12: 790
        • Yoshida K.
        • Taira Y.
        • Matsumura H.
        • Atsuta M.
        Effect of adhesive metal primers on bonding a prosthetic composite resin to metals.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1993; 69: 357-362
        • Kern M.
        • Wegner S.M.
        Bonding to zirconia ceramic: adhesion methods and their durability.
        Dent Mater. 1998; 14: 64-71
        • Walipoor M.
        • Dudley J.
        The influence of a composite resin adhesive on microleakage into the implant screw access chamber.
        Aust Dent J. 2022; 67: 39-45
        • Bailey L.F.
        • Bennett R.J.
        DiCOR surface treatments for enhanced bonding.
        J Dent Res. 1988; 67: 925-931
        • Atta M.O.
        • Smith B.G.
        • Brown D.
        Bond strengths of three chemical adhesive cements adhered to a nickel–chromium alloy for direct bonded retainers.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 63: 137-143
        • Geis-Gerstorfer J.
        In vitro corrosion measurements of dental alloys.
        J Dent. 1994; 22: 247-251
        • Versluis A.
        • Douglas W.H.
        • Sakaguchi R.L.
        Thermal expansion coefficient of dental composites measured with strain gauges.
        Dent Mater. 1996; 12: 290-294
        • Cooley R.L.
        • Barkmeier W.W.
        Dentinal shear bond strength, microleakage, and contraction gap of visible light-polymerized liners/bases.
        Quintessence Int. 1991; 22: 467-474
        • Zanatta R.F.
        • Lungova M.
        • Borges A.B.
        • Torres C.
        • Sydow H.G.
        • Wiegand A.
        Microleakage and shear bond strength of composite restorations under cycling conditions.
        Oper Dent. 2017; 42: E71-E80