Influence of volumetric shrinkage and curing light intensity on proximal contact tightness of class II resin composite restorations: in vitro study

Randomized prospective clinical trial of class II restorations using flowable bulk-fill resin composites: 4-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, prospective, and split-mouth study aimed to evaluate flowable bulk-fill resin composites in class II restorations, comparing it with a conventional layering technique after 4-year follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty-three subjects received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional microhybrid composite resin (PA - Peak Universal + Amelogen Plus, Ultradent); flowable bulk-fill and nanoparticulate composite resins (ABF - Adper Single Bond 2 + Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Filtek Z350XT, 3M/Espe); and flowable bulk-fill and microhybrid composite resins, (XST - XP Bond + SDR + TPH3, Dentsply). The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier, equality test of two proportions, Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, and Logistic regression analysis tests (alpha = 0.05).

RESULTS

In total, 106 restorations were evaluated at 4 years. Both systems with bulk-fill composites presented higher marginal discoloration than PA. About surface texture, ABF restorative system showed superior bravo scores being statistically similar to XST. Better performance for wear and surface staining was found for XST restorative system. All restorative systems resulted in the decreased interproximal contacts, occurring early for XST.

CONCLUSIONS

The restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composites showed satisfactory clinical performance compared with conventional resin composite after 4 years. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact after 4 years.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Initial marginal discoloration was observed in more than 50% of class II restorations performed with restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composite. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact strength over time.

Effects of Adjacent Tooth Type and Occlusal Fatigue on Proximal Contact Force of Posterior Bulk Fill and Incremental Resin Composite Restoration

OBJECTIVES

To measure the proximal contact force in newtons (N) between incremental and bulk fill class II resin composite restorations and implant molar teeth or adjacent premolar teeth with simulated periodontal ligament.

METHODS

The model used was created with a typodont first molar tooth with two bilateral occlusal-proximal class II cavities, an adjacent tooth simulating an implanted molar tooth (Titamax CM, Neodent, Curtiba, PR, Brazil) and a premolar with simulated periodontal ligament. Two resin composite restorative techniques were used: Inc-Z350XT, (Filtek Z350, 3M Oral Care, St. Paul, MN, USA) inserted incrementally and Bulk-OPUS, (Opus Bulk Fill APS, FGM, Joinville, SC, Brazil) high viscosity bulk fill resin composite (n=10). As a control, a typodont having intact teeth without restorations was used. After the restorative procedure, each specimen was radiographed using a digital system (Dürr Dental, Bietigheim-Bissingen, Germany). The proximal contact force (N) was measured using dental floss with a microtensile machine (Microtensile ODEME, Luzerna, SC, Brazil). The specimens were then subjected to mechanical fatigue cycling to simulate 5 years of aging. All the parameters were measured after aging. The X-rays were blindly qualitatively analyzed by two operators to identify the loss of proximal contact. One-way ANOVA was used for comparing the initial contact force between restored and intact teeth. Two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey testing was performed for contact area data and for the contact force/contact area ratio. The proximal contact force data were analyzed using one-way repeated measurement ANOVA followed by Tukey testing (α=0.05). The X-ray proximal contact analyses were described by the frequency.

RESULTS

The initial proximal contact force was similar for intact and restored teeth. The contact force and contact area with the molar were significantly higher than with the premolar; however the contact force/contact area ratio was similar for all tested groups. The bulk fill technique showed a contact force similar to the incremental filling technique. Fatigue resulted in a significant reduction in the proximal contact force (p<0.001), irrespective of the region analyzed or restorative material used. The digital X-rays detected no alteration in the proximal contact after occlusal fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger contact area resulted in higher proximal contact force. Proximal contact force decreased with 5 years of simulated occlusal fatigue. The bulk fill technique showed a proximal contact force similar to that of the incremental filling technique.

Quality of approximal surfaces of posterior restorations in primary molars

PURPOSE

To evaluate the influence of the restorative material and matrix system on proximal contact tightness and morphological characteristics of class II restorations in primary molars.

METHODS

Occluso-mesial cavities in second primary artificial molars were randomly restored using different materials (Filtek Z500 or Filtek Bulk Fill composites or high-viscosity glass ionomer cement Ketac Universal) and different matrix system (Tofflemire, AutoMatrix, matrix band with ring, contoured sectional matrix) (n = 12). Proximal contact tightness was measured using a custom-made device in an Instron 3345, and proximal surface morphology and marginal adaptation were scored after digital scanning. Two-way ANOVA, Tukey and Fischer's exact tests were performed (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Proximal contact tightness values were significantly influenced by the restorative material (P < 0.05), the matrix system (P < 0.001), and their interaction (P < 0.01). Both resin composites showed statistically differences in proximal shape according to the matrix used to restore and exhibited overhanging margins. Ketac Universal restorations showed similar morphology and gaps on the margins regardless of the matrix system.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, both composite restorations achieved tighter proximal contact than those restored with the high-viscosity glass ionomer cement. None of the matrix systems tested provided a convex seamless proximal morphology.

Three-year Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial of Class II Restorations Using Flowable Bulk-fill Resin Composites

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, prospective, and split-mouth study aimed to evaluate flowable bulk-fill resin composites in class II restorations and to compare with a conventional layering technique after a 3-year follow-up.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-three subjects received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional microhybrid resin composite (PA, Peak Universal + Amelogen Plus, Ultradent), flowable bulk-fill and nanoparticulate resin composites (ABF, Adper Single Bond 2 + Filtek Bulk Fill Flow + Filtek Z350XT, 3M Oral Care), and flowable bulk-fill and microhybrid resin composites (XST, XP Bond + SDR + TPH3, Dentsply). The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using the equality test of two proportions, Logistic regression analysis, Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were evaluated at 3 years. XST bulk-fill restorative system presented higher marginal discoloration than PA, and the opposite occurred for surface staining. All restorative systems resulted in decreased interproximal contacts, occurring early for XST.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the restorative system using incremental technique presented better performance for marginal discoloration, one of the restorative systems that used flowable bulk-fill resin composite (XST) showed the lowest surface staining. All restorative systems had decreased proximal contact over time.

A Suggested Technique to Restore a Stable and Tight Contact Point in Diastema Closure

This article presents a case report on diastema closure in anterior teeth with direct resin composite restoration. This suggested approach has been found to be efficient with regards to esthetics, marginal adaptation, and the quality of proximal contacts in diastema closure. These advantages are presented in this report.

The Use of UnimatrixR Matrix System for Restoration of Interdental Contact Points – Case Report

Proper restoration of proximal contact points is a great challenge for any dentist. The special particularities related to an appropriate anatomical and functional restoration at this level are related first of all to the knowledge of the local topography, to the possibilities of dental isolation, the type and the extension of the loss of hard dental substance. Currently, multiple techniques and specific conformation systems are available, which can be adapted to each clinical situation, so that the outcome of the therapeutic maneuver is a success.

Randomized Prospective Clinical Trial of Class II Restorations Using Low-shrinkage Flowable Resin Composite

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective, randomized, split-mouth clinical trial was to evaluate postoperative sensitivity, clinical performance, and interproximal contacts after using different restorative systems.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Fifty-three subjects each received three class II restorations according to the restorative systems: conventional resin composite (PA: Peak Universal+Amelogen Plus, Ultradent), low-shrinkage flowable and nanoparticulate resin composites (ABF: Adper Single Bond 2+Filtek Bulk Fill Flow+Filtek Z350XT, 3M ESPE), and low-shrinkage flowable and microhybrid resin composites (XST: XP Bond+SDR+TPH3, Dentsply). Postoperative sensitivity was assessed at 24 hours, seven days, 90 days, and six months. The clinical performance and interproximal contacts were evaluated at baseline, six months, and one year. Friedman, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests were used to evaluate postoperative sensitivity and interproximal contacts. The equality test of two proportions and logistic regression analysis were used to assess the clinical performance.

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were observed among groups for postoperative sensitivity. The highest spontaneous sensitivity was reported at 24 hours. ABF was the only group that did not present a reduction in cold sensitivity. Color, marginal discoloration, and superficial staining showed differences among the groups. XST did not show superficial staining after one year. No differences were observed among groups in relation to interproximal contacts. XST resulted in the loss of interproximal contact after one year.

CONCLUSIONS

Different types of restorative systems do not influence postoperative sensitivity; however, ABF maintained cold sensitivity over time. Marginal discoloration occurred for all groups but occurred earliest for PA. XST presented a reduction of interproximal contact after one year of evaluation.

Cuspal Deflection of Premolars Restored with Bulk-Fill Composite Resins

OBJECTIVE

This in vitro study compared cuspal deflection of premolars restored with three bulk-fill composite resins to that of incrementally-restored ones with a low-shrinkage silorane-based restorative material.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty freshly-extracted intact human upper premolars were used. Reference points at buccal and palatal cusp tips were acid-etched and composite rods were horizontally bonded to them (TPH-Spectra-HV, Dentsply). Two acrylic resin guiding paths were made for each premolar to guide beaks of a digital micrometer used for cuspal deflection measurements. Standardized MOD cavities, 3 mm wide bucco-lingually and 3.5 mm deep, were prepared on each premolar. Prepared teeth were then equally divided into four groups (n = 10) and each group was assigned to one of four composite resin (QuiXX, Dentsply; X-tra fil, Voco; Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Ivoclar Vivadent; low-shrinkage Filtek LS, 3M/ESPE). Adper Single Bond-Plus, 3M/ESPE was used with all bulk-fill restoratives. LS-System Adhesive, 3M/ESPE was used with Filtek LS. For each prepared premolar, cuspal deflection was measured in microns as the difference between two readings between reference points before and after restoration completion. Means and SDs were calculated and data statistically-analyzed using One-way ANOVA and Tukey's test.

RESULTS

Filtek LS showed the lowest mean cuspal deflection value 6.4(0.84)μm followed by Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill 10.1(1.2) μm and X-tra fil 12.4(1.35)μm, while QuiXX showed the highest mean 13(1.05)μm. ANOVA indicated significant difference among mean values of groups (p < 0.001). Tukey's test indicated no significant difference in mean values between QuiXX and X-tra fil (p = 0.637).

CONCLUSIONS

Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill had significantly lower mean cuspal deflection compared with the two other bulk-fill composite resins tested. Filtek LS had the lowest significant mean cuspal deflection in comparison to all tested bulk-fill restoratives.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The use of Tetric EvoCeram Bulk fill composite resin restorative for class II MOD cavities resulted in reduced cuspal deflection in comparison to the two other bulk-fill composite resins tested. The silorane-based Filtek LS restorative resulted in the least cuspal deflection in comparison to all tested bulk-fill composite restoratives.

Marginal integrity of restorations produced with a model composite based on polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane (POSS)

Marginal integrity is one of the most crucial aspects involved in the clinical longevity of resin composite restorations.