Conventional-, bulk-fill- or flowable-resin composites as prosthetic core build-up: Influence on the load-bearing capacity under fatigue of bonded leucite-reinforced glass-ceramic

This study aimed to evaluate the fatigue performance of simplified ceramic restorations (leucite-reinforced glass ceramic) adhesively cemented onto substrates of different resin composites. Three options from the same commercial line were selected (Tetric N-Line, Ivoclar), classified as Conventional (CRC), Bulk-fill (BRC) and Flowable (FRC), which were used to make discs using a cylindrical metallic device (n = 19; Ø = 10 mm, thickness = 2.0 mm). A total of 57 discs (Ø = 10 mm, thickness = 1.0 mm) were made from CAD/CAM prefabricated blocks of a leucite reinforced glass-ceramic (Empress CAD, Ivoclar) to simulate a monolithic restoration, then were randomly distributed to be bonded on 19 discs of each three different resin composite substrates (CRC; BRC; or FRC) with a dual resin cement (Multilink N; Ivoclar). The samples were subjected to a compression test with a hemispherical stainless-steel piston (Ø = 40 mm) at a monotonic regimen (n = 4; 1 mm/min loading rate and 500 kgf loading cell until fracture). The cyclic fatigue test was performed underwater at a frequency of 20 Hz (n = 15). The first step was applied using 200N for 5000 cycles, followed by increments of 50N at each step of 10,000 until failure. The outcome considered for both tests was the occurrence of radial crack. Specific statistical tests (α = 0.05) were performed for monotonic (One-way ANOVA; Tukey's test) and fatigue data (Kaplan-Meier test; Log-rank test). Fractography of fractured samples were also performed. The FRC group had the lowest failure load in both test regimes (p < 0.05; monotonic: 726.64N; fatigue: 716.67N). There were no differences between the CRC and BRC groups (p > 0.05; monotonic: 989.30 and 990.11N; fatigue: 810.00 and 833.33N, respectively). The same result was obtained considering cycles for fatigue failure (FRC < CRC=BRC). Leucite glass-ceramic bonded to substrates made of flowable resin composite behaves worse mechanically than bonding to conventional or bulk-fill resin composite substrates.

Comparison of two composite resin materials for splinting of dental luxation injuries: A double blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND/AIM

Luxation is a common traumatic dental injury treated with a wire composite (WC) splint. However, bulk-fill flowable composite and conventional packable composite have not been compared for retaining these splints. Therefore, the objectives of this randomized controlled trial were (1) to compare retention of WC splints, and (2) to compare adhesive point dimension, application and removal time, and effect on tooth mobility between the two WC splints.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this parallel group, non-inferiority double blind randomized controlled trial, a total of 90 patients, aged 16-50 years participated. They were randomly allocated into two groups, the packable composite group (PC) n = 45 and the bulk-fill flowable composite group (BF-FC) n = 45 by lottery method. Following measurements were taken at the splint application appointment. Horizontal tooth mobility measured via Periotest, splint application time, and frontal images of splinted teeth to measure the percentage composite adhesive point area. After 2 weeks, splints were visually inspected for retention, whereas mobility and removal times were also recorded. Statistically, comparisons were made using independent samples sample T-test, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U at p ≤ .05.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients with 156 luxated teeth completed the trial, as two patients were lost to follow-up. Two patients in the PC group reported with completely de-bonded splints while none de-bonded in the BF-FC group. Both groups were similar in terms of splint retention (p = .352), reduction of mobility (p = .426), and splint removal times (p = .372). The BF-FC group performed significantly better in adhesive point dimension percentages (p < .001) and splint application time (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Both groups were comparable in most parameters of the study. However, for BF-FC group application time and adhesive point dimension were significantly less.

Contemporary flowable bulk-fill resin-based composites: a systematic review

Flowable bulk-fill resin-based composites (BF-RBCs) represent a new and interesting alternative for the bulk-fill restorative techniques in the posterior region. However, they comprise a heterogeneous group of materials, with important differences in composition and design. Therefore, the aim of the present systematic review was to compare the main properties of flowable BF-RBCs, including their composition, degree of monomer conversion (DC), polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress, as well as flexural strength. The search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines in the Medline (PubMed), Scopus and Web of Science databases. In vitro articles reporting on the DC, polymerization shrinkage/shrinkage stress, and flexural strength of flowable BF-RBCs strength were included. The QUIN risk-of-bias (RoB) tool was used for assessing the study quality. From initially 684 found articles, 53 were included. Values for DC ranged between 19.41 and 93.71%, whereas polymerization shrinkage varied between 1.26 and 10.45%. Polymerization shrinkage stresses reported by most studies ranged between 2 and 3 MPa. Flexural strength was above 80 MPa for most materials. A moderate RoB was observed in most studies. Flowable BF-RBCs meet the requirements to be indicated for bulk fill restoration technique in the posterior region. However, important variations among composition and properties hinder extrapolation of the results to materials different from those reported here. Clinical studies are urgently required to assess their performance under a real working scenario.

Do preheated composite resin or adhesive resin layer strengthen the feldspar ceramic?

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Preheated composite resin and adhesive coating have been recommended as luting agents for ceramic veneers; however, information about the mechanical behavior of feldspathic porcelain veneers after using these methods is still limited.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the influence of the use of preheated composite resin or an adhesive resin layer on the strengthening of a feldspathic porcelain.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Feldspathic porcelain disks were fabricated (N=210), etched (10% hydrofluoric acid for 90 seconds), and bonded according to resin-based luting agents (30 per group) for the biaxial flexural strength tests: photopolymerized resin cement, flowable composite resin, preheated composite resin, with or without previous adhesive coating. Characteristic strength and Weibull modulus were calculated. The viscosity of the luting agents was measured by using isothermal analyses. Finite element analysis simulated the flexural test. Fractographic and bonded interfaces were observed.

RESULTS

The use of preheated composite resin led to the lowest stress levels in the feldspathic porcelain veneers. However, it did not increase the ceramic strengthening compared with other luting agents, as higher values were observed with flowable composite resin (P<.05). The use of an adhesive resin layer had no significant effect on ceramic strengthening when associated with preheated composite resin or resin cement (P>.05). Preheated composite resin presented the highest viscosity and led to incomplete filling of the porcelain surface irregularities. Failures originated on the ceramic surface subjected to tensile stress and were typically associated with pores at the ceramic-luting agent interface.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of preheated composite resin or an adhesive resin layer did not have a positive effect on strengthening feldspathic porcelain.

Fracture Resistance and Microleakage around Direct Restorations in High C-Factor Cavities

The aim of this research was to evaluate the mechanical impact of different direct restorations in terms of fracture resistance, and subsequent fracture pattern, in occlusal high C-factor cavities. Furthermore, the adaptation of different direct restorations in the form of gap formation was also evaluated. Seventy-two intact mandibular molars were collected and randomly distributed into three groups (n = 24). Class I occlusal cavities with standardized dimensions were prepared in all specimens. After adhesive treatment, the cavities were restored with direct restorations utilizing three different materials. Group 1: layered conventional packable resin composite (Filtek Ultimate), Group 2: bulk-fill resin composite (SDR), Group 3: bulk-fill short fibre-reinforced composite (SFRC; everX Posterior) covered with packable composite occlusally. Half of the restored specimens underwent static load-to fracture testing (n = 12/group), while the rest underwent sectioning and staining for microleakage evaluation and gap formation analysis. Fracture patterns were evaluated visually among the mechanically tested specimens. The layered composite restoration (Group 1) showed significantly lower fracture resistance compared to the bulk fill groups (Group 2, p = 0.005, Group 3, p = 0.008), while there was no difference in fracture resistance between the other groups. In terms of gap formation values, the layered composite restoration (Group 1) produced significantly higher gap formation compared to the bulk-fill groups (Group 2, p = 0.000, Group 3, p = 0.000). Regarding the fracture pattern, SFRC (Group 3) produced the highest number, while SDR (Group 2) produced the lowest number of repairable fractures. The use of bulk-fill resin composite (fibre or non-fibre-reinforced) for occlusal direct restorations in high C-factor cavities showed promising achievements regarding both fracture resistance and microleakage. Furthermore, the use of short fibre-reinforced bulk-fill composite can also improve the fracture pattern of the restoration-tooth unit. Bulk-fill materials provide a simple and effective solution for restoring and reinforcing high C-factor occlusal cavities.

Direct and semi-direct resin composite restoration in large cavity preparations: analysis of dentin bond strength stability and bottom/top microhardness ratio in a cavity model

To evaluate the influence of the restorative approach and aging time on dentin bond strength (BS), failure mode (FM), and bottom/top microhardness ratio (B/T) in a large dentin cavity model. A total of 102 bovine incisors were used to produce models of conical dentin cavities (4.0 mm thickness × 4.8 mm top diameter × 2.8 mm bottom diameter), which were restored using semi-direct filling (SDF) (Filtek™ Z250 XT + Scotchbond™ Universal/RelyX™ Ultimate luting system), direct bulk filling (DBF) (Filtek™ One Bulk Fill), and direct incremental filling (DIF) (Filtek™ Z250 XT) techniques. B/T, BS, and FM (n = 17) were analyzed in a microhardness tester, a universal testing machine, and a stereomicroscope, respectively, after 24 h and 6 months of water storage. BS and B/T data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA/Tukey post-hoc test (p < 0.05), while FM data were analyzed descriptively. There was a statistically significant difference in BS between the restorative techniques, and BS was influenced by aging time in the DBF and SDF groups. Mixed failure was predominant for the SDF technique in both aging times. There was no statistically significant difference in B/T among the restorative approaches regardless of the aging time (p > 0.05). Although all restorative approaches provided similar B/T, the semi-direct technique showed better performance on the material bond strength to dentine in large cavities.

Effect of acid challenge and photoactivation distance on microhardness and roughness of flow bulk-fill composite resins

Abstract Introduction composite resins are indicated to the reconstruction of proximal walls and the evaluation of properties of flow bulk-fill composite resins exposed to acid challenge is necessary. Objective to evaluate the microhardness and roughness at different depths of photoactivation of bulk-fill flow composites (Filtek Bulk Fill Flow; SureFil SDR Flow; Tetric N Ceram Bulk fill) and conventional composite resin (control, Filtek Z350 XT) subjected to acid challenge. Material and method forty composites brick shaped specimens (3x3x4 mm) were made using a polyacetal matrix. To simulate pH challenges, the samples were immersed in a demineralizing solution. Each sample had Knoop microhardness (KHN) and roughness (Ra) evaluated at three depths (superficial, medium, and cervical), considering the lateral surface of the sample. Data were submitted to Kruskal-Wallis, Friedman's and Dunn's tests with a significance level of 5%. Result comparing the composites among themselves, in superficial (p=0.693), medium (p=0.053) and cervical (p=0.176) regions, there was no difference in the KHN values. There were also no differences in roughness between the composites in superficial (p=0.356), medium (p=0.734) and cervical (p=0.207) regions. Only the Filtek Z350 XT (p=0.027) showed less difference in KHN in the middle region caused by acid challenge. Changes in roughness showed that the greatest difference was at the cervical region for Bulk Fill Flow SDR (p=0.014) and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (p = 0.003) with an increase after acid challenge. Conclusion after acid challenge, bulk-fill flow composites showed alterations similar to those presented by the conventional nanoparticulate resin composite.

Bonding performance and mechanical properties of flowable bulk-fill and traditional composites in high c-factor cavity models

Objectives:

The aim of this study is to evaluate bond strength (BS), shrinkage stress (SS), flexural strength (FS), and elastic modulus (E) of three flowable bulk fill in comparison with conventional composites.

Materials and Methods:

Three bulk fill (Filtek Bulk Fill Flow, Surefil SDR, X-tra Base) and three conventional composites (Filtek Z250 XT, Grandioso, Dentsply TPH3) were used. For BS, conical cavities (n = 10) were prepared in bovine dentine and restored with materials and were analyzed through push-out test in a universal testing machine (UTM). For FS/EM, 60 (n = 10) bar specimens (7 mm × 2 mm × 1 mm) were prepared and evaluated with a UTM. SS was measured in UTM coupled to an extensometer (n = 5). The data were statistically evaluated using one-way ANOVA/Tukey tests (P < 0.05).

Results:

Conventional composites showed higher E when compared to bulk-fill composites. Regarding FS, they showed similar results, except for (XBF) Xtra Bulk Fill that was inferior. SS and BS of bulk-fill composites were significantly lower and higher than conventional composites, respectively, except for XBF, which showed similar BS to conventional ones.

Conclusions:

Flowable bulk-fill composites, except XBF, showed higher BS, lower SS, similar FS, and lower E when compared to conventional ones.

Interfacial Properties and Bottom/Top Hardness Ratio Produced by Bulk Fill Composites in Dentin Cavities

The aim of this study was to evaluate the bond strength, bottom/top hardness ratio, marginal adaptation, and interfacial nanoleakage of regular viscosity bulk fill composites (RVBFC) and regular viscosity traditional composites (RVTC). Two RVBFC (Filtek Bulk Fill and Aura Bulk Fill) and two RVTC (Filtek Z250XT and Aura) were assessed. Forty conical cavities (4.8×2.8×4.0) were prepared in bovine dentin and restored with composites (n=10). After 24h in water, marginal adaptation was evaluated by staining with a caries detector. The top and bottom surfaces of the conical restorations were stained for five seconds and the gap percentage in the composite/dentin interface was determined using digital images on a measurement program (ImageTool). The Vickers microhardness was measured and the bottom/top microhardness ratio (B/T) was determined. Push-out bond strength test was performed in a universal testing machine (0.5mm/min) and failure modes were evaluated in a stereomicroscope (20×). Other specimens (n=3) were produced for interfacial nanoleakage evaluation. Data were analyzed using one and two-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (α=0.05). The gap percentage was higher in the bottom compared to the top. The B/T ratio of the Aura Bulk Fill was statistically lower than other composites. Push-out bond strength were similar among composites. The RVBFC presented lower nanoleakage than the RVTC in the bottom of the conical restoration and there was no difference among the materials in the top surfaces. In conclusion, Filtek Bulk Fill performed better than Aura Bulk Fill regarding the analyzed properties.

Clinical performance and chemical-physical properties of bulk fill composites resin -a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of clinical and laboratory studies to compare the performance of bulk-fill and conventional composite resins in terms of polymerization shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusp deflection, marginal quality, degree of conversion, microhardness, flexural strength, fracture strength and clinical performance.

DATA

One hundred three articles were included in this study, and the Peto method was used to compare the bulk-fill and conventional composites using the RevMan software.

SOURCES

Searches were performed in the PubMed and Scopus databases.

STUDY SELECTION

Laboratory studies and randomized clinical trials comparing one of the previous detailed outcomes between bulk-fill and control composites were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The bulk-fill composite resins showed less shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusp deflection and microhardness than conventional composites, while both materials presented a similar marginal quality, flexural strength and fracture strength. Also, bulk-fill materials with regular viscosity showed similar shrinkage. The conversion of bulk-fill materials with flowable consistency were similar to conventional composite resins with a thickness of up to 2mm and greater than conventional composites with a thickness greater than 2mm. Despite these in vitro differences, the clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional composite resins was similar in randomized clinical trials, with one to ten years of follow up. In conclusion, the bulk-fill materials show better or similar performance to the conventional materials in clinical trials and laboratory studies in terms of volumetric shrinkage, polymerization stress, cusps deflection and marginal quality, with the only exception being the lower level of microhardness observed for bulk-fill composites with thickness up to 2mm.

Effect of light-curing time on light-cure/post-cure volumetric polymerization shrinkage and regional ultimate tensile strength at different depths of bulk-fill resin composites

The aim of this study was to investigate volumetric polymerization shrinkage (VS), using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT), of bulk-fill composites with different light-curing strategies; immediately after light-irradiation and after 24 h, and to evaluate their regional ultimate tensile strength (UTS) at different curing depths. The immediate VS after photo-polymerization decreased when the curing light-curing time was reduced from 20 to 10 to 5 s. On the other hand, their VS values after 24 h significantly increased due to the post-cure polymerization, resulting in similar VS values at all the light-curing times. Five seconds light-curing decreased the regional UTS of resin composites after the 24 h period compared with the 10 and 20 s light-curing regimes; therefore, the remarkable progress of post-cure polymerization after light-curing for a short time would not lead to an improvement in the mechanical properties of resin composites. The influence of the light-curing time on the curing depth was dependent upon the bulk-fill composite material.

New generation bulk-fill resin composites: Effects on mechanical strength and fracture reliability

PURPOSE

To investigate the mechanical performance and fracture reliability of new generation, bulk-fill resin composites of different viscosities.

METHODS

Forty sound maxillary premolars were prepared into Class I cavities comprised of 5 mm width × 5 mm length × 5 mm thickness. The teeth were randomly allocated into four groups (n = 10) according to the restorative material: Negative control - without restoration; Positive control - conventional resin composite (Opallis; FGM) was applied using increments of up to 2.0 mm-thick; Bulk-Regular - bulk-fill resin composite of regular viscosity (Opus Bulk Fill; FGM) was applied using a single increment of 5 mm-thick; and Bulk-Flow - a low-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite (Opus Bulk Fill Flow; FGM) was applied as the first increment with ∼3.5 mm-thick, followed by two final increments of Opallis (∼1.5 mm-thick). The teeth were stored at 37 °C, for 24 h, and submitted to a mechanical testing machine (DL500; EMIC) under a compressive loading. Work of fracture (W_f) was also obtained. All data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey (α = 5%). Reliability of restorations and probability of failure were analyzed by Weibull analysis.

RESULTS

The non-restored teeth showed the weakest behavior of the study. All the restored groups demonstrated similar mechanical properties to each other (p ≥ 0.242). The positive and negative controls failed exclusively within the cohesiveness of enamel/dentin, whereas the bulk-fill-based restorations showed a mixture of cohesive and mixed failures. The restored groups showed an overall similar reliability, although the Bulk-Regular group demonstrated greater characteristic strength than the positive control.

CONCLUSION

The novel bulk-fill resin composites of low and regular viscosities show promising application in the restoration of Class I cavities in premolars, demonstrating similar mechanical performance and reliability as compared with restorations prepared using conventional resin composites. From the bulk-fill materials, the version with regular viscosity presented the greatest compliant behavior of the study.