The objectives of this study were to evaluate the mechanical and physical properties of resin composites. The materials evaluated were the Clearfil Majesty Posterior, Filtek Z550 and G-aenial Posterior composites. A total of 189 specimens were fabricated for microhardness, roughness, gloss and color tests. The specimens were divided into three finishing and polishing systems: Enhance, OneGloss and Sof-Lex Spiral. Microhardness, roughness, gloss and color were measured after 24 h and after 10,000 thermocycles. Two samples from each group were evaluated using SEM and AFM. G-aenial Posterior exhibited the lowest microhardness values. The mean roughness ranged from 0.37 to 0.61 µm. The smoothest surfaces were obtained with Sof-Lex Spiral for each material. G-aenial Posterior with Enhance was determined to be the glossiest surfaces. All of the materials exhibited similar ΔE values ranging between 1.69 and 2.75. Sof-Lex Spiral discs could be used successfully to polish composites.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of three different drinks on the color parameters of four different restorative materials.Materials and MethodsThree different composites (Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative, Filtek Ultimate Flowable, and Filtek Silorane, 3M ESPE) and a polyacid-modified composite resin material (Dyract XP, Dentsply DeTrey GmbH) were evaluated. Eighty-four disc-shaped specimens of 8 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness were prepared (n = 21 each). Color coordinates (L*a*b*, ΔL*, Δa*, Δb*, and ΔE*) were measured using a VİTA Easyshade Compact (VİTA Zahnfabrik) after 24 hr of storage (baseline) and after 30 day of storage in three different beverages of black tea, Coca cola, or water (control) (n = 7). In each beverage, the specimens were stored three times a day, one hr each, for 30 day. The color changes (ΔE) were calculated and were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn multiple comparison test.ResultsThe color difference (ΔE*) of the resin materials ranged between 1.31 and 15.28 after 30 day of immersion in the staining solutions. Dyract XP in Coca cola (15.28 ± 2.61) and black tea (12.22 ± 2.73) showed the highest mean ΔE* value after 30 day, followed by Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative (5.99 ± 1.25) and Filtek Ultimate Flowable (4.71 ± 1.40) in black tea (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe compomers displayed unacceptable color changes at the end of 30 day in all beverages. Among resin composites, the silorane based composite exhibited relatively good color stability than the others. Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative and Filtek Flowable showed similar color changes in all beverages.

The aim of this study was to investigate (i) the effect of direct or indirect polymerisation of adhesive-impregnated ribbon fibre under 4-mm bulk-filled composites on fracture strength; (ii) to compare polyethylene ribbon fibre-reinforcement composites with short fibre-reinforced composite; and (iii) the effectiveness of polyethylene ribbon fibre according to the restorative materials used (low-viscous bulk-fill composite, high-viscous flowable composite or conventional paste composite). Seventy molars were divided into seven groups; (groups 1-2) Ribbond-reinforced Surefil-SDR; (group 3) Ribbond-reinforced G Aenial Flo; (group 4) Ribbond-reinforced G Aenial Posterior; (group 5) short fibre-reinforced composite everX Posterior; (group 6) unfilled cavity; (group 7) intact teeth. Ribbond was adopted to cavity walls by impregnating an adhesive and using a flowable composite. In group 1, adhesive-impregnated Ribbond was polymerised directly using a light-curing-unit, and indirectly in group 2 under 4-mm bulk-filled composite. Direct or indirect polymerisation of adhesive impregnated ribbon fibre under 4-mm bulk-filled composite did not change the fracture strength results. Polyethylene ribbon fibre-reinforced groups (groups 1-4) and short fibre-reinforced composite group (group 5) displayed similar results. Polyethylene ribbon fibre can be used safely under 4-mm bulk-filled composites. Ribbond-reinforced low-viscous bulk-fill, high-viscous flowable, and conventional paste composite exhibited similar fracture strength results.

BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the flexural strength and microhardness of three different anterior composites after 10 000 thermocycles.Material and MethodsThe mechanical properties of a nano-fill composite (Filtek Ultimate Universal Restorative (FUR) (Enamel)), a nano-hybrid composite (Clearfil Majesty ES2 (ES2) (Enamel)), and a micro-hybrid composite (G Aenial Anterior (GAA)) were investigated in this study. For the microhardness test, 8-mm diameter and 2-mm thickness composite discs were used (n = 10), and for the flexural strength test, 25x2x2 mm bar-shaped specimens were prepared (n = 13). The specimens were tested at 24 h and after 10 000 thermocycles. Data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and the post-hoc Tukey test (p < .05). Correlations between hardness and flexural strength were calculated using Pearson’s correlation analysis.ResultsThere was a significant difference in the microhardness values of the materials (p < .05). FUR exhibited significantly higher microhardness than ES2 and GAA. However, the flexural strength of three composites was statistically similar at 24 h (p > .05). Pearson correlation analysis revealed that there was a negative relationship between the mean hardness and flexural strength values (correlation coefficient = -0.367, p = .043). After 10 000 thermocycles, microhardness values of each material and flexural strength of ES2 and GAA decreased significantly according to 24 h.ConclusionsThe nano-fill composite FUR displayed significantly higher microhardness values. However, each resin composite was statistically similar for flexural strength values. Ten thousand thermocycles significantly affected microhardness and flexural strength. Key words:Flexural strength, microhardness, anterior composites.

No abstract