ABSTRACT
Resumen: El uso de resinas compuestas Bulk-Fill para la restauración de dientes posteriores ha sido masificada en los últimos años en las diferentes disciplinas clínicas de la Odontología. Esto puede deberse principalmente a la simplicidad en la técnica de aplicación de este material ya que requiere de su inserción dentro de la preparación cavitaria en espesores de resina compuesta de hasta 4-5mm, lográndose una reducción considerable de tiempo de trabajo clínico. Ante la existencia de diferentes viscosidades de este tipo de resinas compuestas, ciertas dificultades han sido identificadas ante la selección de cada material Bulk-Fill en relación a las posibles combinaciones que se pueden realizar entre las diferentes marcas disponibles en el mercado, inclusive cuando se usan junto con resinas compuestas convencionales. El objetivo del siguiente reporte de caso, es mostrar dos posibilidades clínicas paso a paso utilizando inicialmente resinas Bulk-Fill compactable en un solo incremento para un segundo molar superior, y luego, a través de la combinación de resinas compuestas Bulk-Fill del tipo fluidas, junto a resinas compuestas Bulk-Fill compactables y resinas compuestas convencionales de estratificación para esmaltes de alto índice de refracción para un primer molar superior.
Abstract: The use of Bulk-Fill composite resins to perform posterior restorations has been massified in recent years in the different clinical disciplines of Dentistry. This may be due mainly to the simplicity in the application technique of this material as it requires its insertion into the cavity preparation in 4-5mm of composite resin thickness, achieving a considerable reduction of clinical working time. Given the existence of different viscosities of this type of composite resins, certain difficulties have been identified before the selection of each Bulk-Fill material related to the possible combinations that can be made between the different brands available in the market, even when they are used with conventional composite resins. The purpose of the following case report, is to present two step-by-step clinical possibilities using initially, compactable Bulk-Fill composite resin in a single increment for the restoration of a second upper molar, and later, through the combination of Bulk-Fill flowable composite resin together with compactable Bulk-Fill composite resin and a high- refractive-index enamel-like conventional composite resin, for a first upper molar.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Composite Resins/analysis , Denture RepairABSTRACT
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM: The literature still lacks evidence regarding which polishing techniques have the ideal clinical outcomes for bulk-fill resin composites. PURPOSE: This study evaluated the surface gloss of two commercially available bulk-fill resin composites after different polishing procedures and characterized their micromorphology via scanning electron microscopy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 80 bulk-fill compactable composite resin discs were created. The control group was left untreated, and remaining samples were subjected to different polishing techniques. Gloss units were measured and surface morphology of disc samples was assessed. The Tukey post-hoc test was used to identify any differences. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found between the different polishing systems applied to Filtek BulkFill Posterior and Tetric N Bulk-Fill. No differences were found when the same polishing system was applied for both resins. The highest gloss values were obtained in the control group and the ENA Shiny system; the lowest were obtained with SofLex XT and Soflex Spiral Wheels for the bulk-fill composite resins studied. CONCLUSIONS. Diamond pastes have the highest gloss behavior, followed by diamond rubber points. The systems with aluminum oxide discs present the lower gloss behavior. SEM images provided useful evidence, and future studies should include an evaluation over time.