To evaluate in Class II restorations the marginal adaptation of ten packable composite resins in combination with the proprietary adhesive system. Standard Class II cavities were prepared in 100 extracted molars. The sample was randomly divided into ten groups. In each group, one specific packable composite was tested in association with its own adhesive: Groups: 1) Scotchbond1/FiltekP60; 2) Etch&Prime3.0/Definit; 3) Prime & Bond 2.1/SureFil; 4) Excite/Tetric Condensable; 5) Gluma/Solitaire; 6) Kerr Bonding/Prodigy Condensable; 7) One-step/Pyramid; 8) Tenure/Virtuoso; 9) Syntac/Cavex Packable; 10) Excite/Tetric flow/Tetric Ceram. The restored teeth were sectioned at three levels in the mesiodistal direction and processed for the microleakage test. On each section, the degree of dye penetration along the margins of the restoration was assessed, and the differences in the leakage given by the ten materials at either the occlusal or the cervical margin were evaluated for statistical significance. A statistical analysis was also conducted to assess the significance of the differences between the scores recorded at the occlusal margin and those measured at the cervical margin of the restoration. In general, the scores recorded at the cervical margin were significantly higher than those measured at the occlusal margin (p 0.05). When all of the groups were compared for microleakage at the occlusal margin, the only significant difference revealed by the statistical analysis was that the specimens treated with Etch″ 3.0 and Definit (group 2) exhibited a marginal adaptation significantly worse than that seen in groups 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10. The application of a thin layer of a flowable composite at the cervical margin as a liner underneath the packable composite enhanced the marginal adaptation of the restoration. The use of a self-etching primer to condition the dental substrate resulted at the occlusal margin in greater microleakage than when phosphoric acid was applied.