Real-time in-depth imaging of gap formation in bulk-fill resin composites

Hayashi, Juri; Espigares, Jorge; Takagaki, Tomohiro; Shimada, Yasushi; Tagami, Junji; Numata, Tomoko; Chan, Daniel C.N.; Sadr, Alireza

doi:10.1016/j.dental.2019.01.020

Cited by 37 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, microgaps or non-adapted areas arise at the bottom of the cavity even in recent flowable composites, which the manufacturer claimed were designed to reduce polymerization shrinkage. The same research group also reported that only dual-cure flowable composite showed no internal gaps, unlike all the tested bulk-fill flowable composites, although the gaps were different in degree depending on the material [ 15 ]. In addition, the latest study from the group showed that a flowable composite, which was newly developed and designed for 3 s high irradiance light-curing did not show defect formation [ 24 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, the polymerization shrinkage and stress, and mechanical properties of flowable composites are still concerns for clinicians dealing with large posterior restorations. The polymerization shrinkage and stress of flowable composites may lead to the creation of gaps if adhesion to cavity floor and walls is not adequate, which in turn can lead to microleakage and secondary caries [ 15 ]. In addition, composite restorations in posterior teeth are subjected to a wide range of external forces such as food mastication and unconscious bruxism [ 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relationships between Flexural and Bonding Properties, Marginal Adaptation, and Polymerization Shrinkage in Flowable Composite Restorations for Dental Application

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To evaluate the flexural and bonding properties, marginal adaptation, and polymerization shrinkage in flowable composite restorations and their relationships, four new generation flowable composites, one conventional, and one bulk-fill flowable composite were used in this study. Flexural properties of the composites and shear bond strength to enamel and dentin for flowable restorations were measured immediately and 24 h after polymerization. Marginal adaptation, polymerization shrinkage, and stress were also investigated immediately after polymerization. The flexural properties, and bond strength of the flowable composites to enamel and dentin were much lower immediately after polymerization than at 24 h, regardless of the type of the composite. Polymerization shrinkage and stress varied depending on the material, and bulk-fill flowable composite showed much lower values than the others. The marginal adaptation and polymerization shrinkage of the composites appeared to have a much stronger correlation with a shear bond strength to dentin than to enamel. The weak mechanical properties and bond strengths of flowable composites in the early stage after polymerization must be taken into account when using them in the clinic. In addition, clinicians should be aware that polymerization shrinkage of flowable composites can still lead to the formation of gaps and failure of adaptation to the cavity regardless of the type of composite.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationships between Flexural and Bonding Properties, Marginal Adaptation, and Polymerization Shrinkage in Flowable Composite Restorations for Dental Application

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to this finding, Han, et al 16 (2017) reported that low-viscosity bulk-fill composites showed a higher gap formation volume compared with sonic-activated and high-viscosity bulk-fill composites. Additionally, Jung and Park 30 (2017) and Hayashi, et al 31 (2019) reported that high-viscosity bulk-fill composites showed better marginal adaptation than low-viscosity bulk-fill composites. Alqudaihi, et al 32 (2019) stated that no significant differences were found between different types of bulk-fill composites with respect to cavity adaptation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of a liner under different bulk-fill resin composites: 3D GAP formation analysis by x-ray microcomputed tomography

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gap formation of composite resin restorations is a serious shortcoming in clinical practice. Polymerization shrinkage stress exceeds the tooth-restoration bond strength, and it causes bacterial infiltration within gaps between cavity walls and the restorative material. Thus, an intermediate liner application with a low elastic modulus has been advised to minimize polymerization shrinkage as well as gap formation.Objective:The purpose of this in vitro study was to assess gap formation volume in premolars restored with different bulk-fill composites, with and without a resin-modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGIC) liner, using x-ray micro-computed tomography (micro-CT).Methodology:Sixty extracted human maxillary premolars were divided into six groups according to bucco-palatal dimensions (n=10). Standardized Class II mesio-occluso-distal cavities were prepared. G-Premio Bond (GC Corp., Japan) was applied in the selective-etch mode. Teeth were restored with high-viscosity (Filtek Bulk Fill, 3M ESPE, USA)-FB, sonic-activated (SonicFill 2, Kerr, USA)-SF and low viscosity (Estelite Bulk Fill Flow, Tokuyama, Japan)-EB bulk-fill composites, with and without a liner (Ionoseal, Voco GmbH, Germany)-L. The specimens were subjected to 10,000 thermocycles (5-55°C) and 50,000 simulated chewing cycles (100 N). Gap formation based on the volume of black spaces at the tooth-restoration interface was quantified in mm3 using micro-computed tomography (SkyScan, Belgium), and analyses were performed. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA and the Bonferroni correction test (p < 0.05).Results:The gap volume of all tested bulk-fill composites demonstrated that Group SF (1.581±0.773) had significantly higher values than Group EB (0.717±0.679). Regarding the use of a liner, a significant reduction in gap formation volume was observed only in Group SFL (0.927±0.630) compared with Group SF (1.581±0.773).Conclusion:It can be concluded that different types of bulk-fill composite resins affected gap formation volume. Low-viscosity bulk-fill composites exhibited better adaptation to cavity walls and less gap formation than did sonic-activated bulk-fill composites. The use of an RMGIC liner produced a significant reduction in gap formation volume for sonic-activated bulk-fill composites.

show abstract

“…The novel class of high- and low-viscosity resin nanocomposites has the ability to place in increments of up to 4 or 5 mm in Class-I and Class-II restorations [ 6 , 7 ]. However, gap formation and shrinkage at the higher depth cavity still remains challenging issue for bulk-fill resin composites [ 8 ]. Among them, Filtek bulk-fill Posterior Restorative (3M ESPE, USA) is a notable one having two innovative methacrylate monomers that work in combination with each other in lowering polymerization stress.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Fracture Resistance of Restored Premolars with Novel Composite Materials: An In Vitro Study

Al-Ibraheemi

Jawad

Haider

2021

International Journal of Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During restorative treatment, premolars restored with resin filling materials using the conventional incremental-fill technique take longer restoration time and undermine the integrity of the tooth. The aim of this study was to assess fracture resistance of premolars restored by various types of novel bulk-fill composite resin materials. Forty-eight (n = 48) freshly extracted sound maxillary first premolars were used in this in vitro study. The teeth were divided into six groups, each having 8 specimens. Group A (positive control) was allocated for the intact teeth. For specimens in Groups B to F, a large cavity (Class-II MOD) was prepared with a standardized dimension of cavity (3 mm depth on the pulpal floor, 4 mm at the gingival seat, and 3 mm cavity width). Group B represented prepared teeth without any restoration. Group C, Group D, Group E, and Group F were restored with Tetric EvoCeram® incremental-fill (conventional), Beautifil bulk-fill, Filtek posterior bulk-fill, and SonicFill 2 bulk-fill restorative materials, respectively. All samples were finished and polished with an enhanced finishing kit and stored in distilled water for a month before the fracture resistance testing. All the samples were exposed to the axial loading (the speed of crosshead was 1 mm/min) in a computer-controlled universal testing machine (LARYEE, China) via a steel bar (6 mm in diameter) and the maximum applied force in Newton was recorded as the fracture resistance. One-way analysis of variance (SPSS 21) was used to compare the fracture resistance within the groups, and Tukey’s post hoc test was used to determine the difference between the groups. The lowest value of fracture resistance was recorded for Group B, and the highest value was recorded for Group A followed by the values of Group D, Group C, Group F, and Group E. One-way ANOVA revealed a statistically significant difference between the groups ( P < 0.05 ). Nonsignificant difference was found between the premolars restored by bulk-fill and conventional composites. Among the bulk-fill restored specimens, Beautifil restorative demonstrated significantly higher fracture resistance in comparison with the other two bulk-fill restored specimen groups (SonicFill 2 and Filtek). Bulk-fill composite such as Beautifil could be an alternative option to conventional incremental-fill composite for premolar restoration.

show abstract

Real-time in-depth imaging of gap formation in bulk-fill resin composites

Cited by 37 publications

References 50 publications

Relationships between Flexural and Bonding Properties, Marginal Adaptation, and Polymerization Shrinkage in Flowable Composite Restorations for Dental Application

Relationships between Flexural and Bonding Properties, Marginal Adaptation, and Polymerization Shrinkage in Flowable Composite Restorations for Dental Application

The use of a liner under different bulk-fill resin composites: 3D GAP formation analysis by x-ray microcomputed tomography

Assessing Fracture Resistance of Restored Premolars with Novel Composite Materials: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About