RESUMO
Packable resin composites may offer improved properties and clinical performance over conventional resin composites or dental amalgam. This in vitro study examined the cuspal stiffness of molars restored with a packable resin composite, a conventional posterior microfilled resin composite and amalgam. Forty-eight intact caries-free human third molars were distributed into four treatment groups (n=12) so that the mean cross-sectional areas of all groups were equal. Standardized MOD cavity preparations were made and specimens restored using one of four restorative materials: (1) a spherical particle amalgam (Tytin); (2) Tytin amalgam with a dentin adhesive liner (OptiBond Solo); (3) a conventional microfilled posterior resin composite (Heliomolar); (4) a packable posterior resin composite (Prodigy Posterior). Cuspal stiffness was measured using a Bionix 200 biomaterials testing machine (MTS). Specimens were loaded vertically to 300 N at a crosshead speed of 1.0 mm/minute. Stiffness was measured at 10 intervals: (1) prior to cavity preparation (intact); (2) following cavity preparation, but before restoration; (3) seven days after restoration; then (4) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 12 months after restoration. All specimens were stored at 37 degrees C in deionized water throughout the study and thermocycled (5 degrees/55 degrees C; 2000 cycles) monthly for 12 months. Repeated Measures ANOVA revealed significant differences among treatment groups over time (p<0.0001). Cavity preparation reduced cuspal stiffness by more than 60%. At 12 months, the cuspal stiffness of restored teeth was, on average, 58% that of intact specimens. Neither the packable nor the conventional resin composite increased cuspal stiffness over that of amalgam.
