No abstract

No abstract

The present data indicate that the enamel bond durability of universal adhesives in the self-etch mode might be sufficient for clinical use.

SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of finishing and polishing methods on surface properties of bulk-fill resin composites through surface roughness (Ra) and surface free energy (SFE) measurements, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observations. Three bulk-fill resin composites, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TB), Filtek Bulk Fill (FB), and Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative (FF), and two conventional resin composites, Clearfil AP-X (AP) and Estelite ∑ Quick (EQ) were used. Seventy cured specimens of each resin composite were prepared and divided into seven groups of 10 specimens. Ra, SFE measurements, and SEM observations were conducted after finishing and polishing procedures. Three groups of specimens were finished with a fine grit diamond bur (FDB), and three with a tungsten carbide bur (CBB). After finishing, one group from each type of finishing was polished with aluminum oxide flexible disks (SSD) and one group from each type of finishing was polished with diamond particles embedded in a silicone point (CMP). A baseline group of samples that were neither finished nor polished after removing the translucent strips from the surface was examined. Although the baseline group showed significantly lower Ra values than the other groups, most resin composites showed lower Ra values with CBB+SSD than with the other finishing and polishing groups. Among the tested resin composites, EQ showed significantly lower Ra values than the other resin composites, regardless of the finishing and polishing methods. On the other hand, AP showed significantly higher Ra values than the other resin composites in all finishing and polishing groups, apart from FB with FDB. For the finished specimens, most resin composites showed higher SFE values with CBB than with FDB. For the polished specimens, all the tested resin composites with CMP showed lower γS values than those with SSD, regardless of the finishing method. The baseline groups of TB and FB showed significantly lower SFE values than the other finished and polished groups. In the SEM observations, all the examined resin composites showed rougher surfaces after finishing with FDB than with CBB. However, when comparing the different polishing methods (CMP and SSD), surface smoothness appeared to be material dependent.

The present study determined the mechanical properties and volumetric polymerization shrinkage of different categories of resin composite. Three high viscosity bulk fill resin composites were tested: Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TB, Ivoclar Vivadent), Filtek Bulk Fill posterior restorative (FB, 3M ESPE), and Sonic Fill (SF, Kerr Corp). Two low-shrinkage resin composites, Kalore (KL, GC Corp) and Filtek LS Posterior (LS, 3M ESPE), were used. Three conventional resin composites, Herculite Ultra (HU, Kerr Corp), Estelite ∑ Quick (EQ, Tokuyama Dental), and Filtek Supreme Ultra (SU, 3M ESPE), were used as comparison materials. Following ISO Specification 4049, six specimens for each resin composite were used to determine flexural strength, elastic modulus, and resilience. Volumetric polymerization shrinkage was determined using a water-filled dilatometer. Data were evaluated using analysis of variance followed by Tukey's honestly significant difference test (α=0.05). The flexural strength of the resin composites ranged from 115.4 to 148.1 MPa, the elastic modulus ranged from 5.6 to 13.4 GPa, and the resilience ranged from 0.70 to 1.0 MJ/m. There were significant differences in flexural properties between the materials but no clear outliers. Volumetric changes as a function of time over a duration of 180 seconds depended on the type of resin composite. However, for all the resin composites, apart from LS, volumetric shrinkage began soon after the start of light irradiation, and a rapid decrease in volume during light irradiation followed by a slower decrease was observed. The low shrinkage resin composites KL and LS showed significantly lower volumetric shrinkage than the other tested materials at the measuring point of 180 seconds. In contrast, the three bulk fill resin composites showed higher volumetric change than the other resin composites. The findings from this study provide clinicians with valuable information regarding the mechanical properties and polymerization kinetics of these categories of current resin composite.