{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034764826175869123, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01772324471710975, 'mean_word_length': 4.518796992481203, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effect of wet and dry bonding techniques on marginal leakage.

PURPOSE
To evaluate the effect of wet and dry bonding on microleakage of Class V restorations bonded with three bonding agents.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
60 extracted human premolars and molars were randomly assigned to three groups for bonding with Gluma CPS, EBS (ESPE) and Prime & Bond 2.1. Cavities were cut in both the buccal and lingual surfaces. Half of each preparation was in enamel and the other was in cementum/dentin. The cavities were restored with composite after the application of dentin bonding agents using a wet and dry technique for each material. The teeth were stored in distilled water for 6 days at 37 degrees C, thermocycled, and the restorations examined microscopically for leakage using Procion Brilliant Red as a marker.


RESULTS
All groups showed microleakage at both the enamel and dentin margins. At the gingival margin, there was a significant difference between the groups for both wet-bonding (P = 0.039) and dry-bonding (P = 0.024). There was no significant difference between the groups at the enamel margin (wet bonding: P = 0.179, dry-bonding: P = 0.357). The wet-bonding technique was compared with the dry-bonding technique for each material at both the gingival and enamel margins and no significant differences were observed (in all cases P > 0.47). SEM showed that in dye-labeled areas debonding occurred mostly, but not always, near the resin-hybrid interface.