Effect of Using Manufacturer-recommended Exposure Times to Photo-activate Bulk-fill and Conventional Resin-based Composites.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effect of using the resin-based composite manufacturer's recommended exposure time on the degree of conversion (DC), Knoop hardness (KH), and elastic modulus (E) of conventional and bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs). METHODS: Three resin-based composites (RBCs) were tested: Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TET), Opus Bulk Fill APS (OPU), and RBC Vittra APS (VIT). They were photo-activated in 2 mm deep, 6 mm diameter molds for their recommended exposure times of 10 seconds, 20 seconds, or 40 seconds from four light-curing units (LCUs). Two delivered a single emission peak in the blue light region (Optilight Max and Radii-Cal) and two delivered multiple emission peaks in the violet and blue region (VALO Cordless and Bluephase G2). After 24 hours of dry storage at 37°C in the dark, the KH (Kgf/mm2), E (MPa) and DC (%) at the top and bottom surfaces of specimens (n=5) were measured and the results analyzed by 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by a Tukey test (α=0.05). RESULTS: The irradiance (mW/cm2) and spectral irradiance (mW/cm2/nm) from the LCUs were reduced significantly (8-35%) after passing through 2.0 mm of RBC (p<0.001). The DC at the bottom of VIT and TET was less than at the top surface (p<0.001). OPU had the same DC at the top and bottom surface (p=0.341). The KH and E values at the top surface of VIT and TET were substantially higher than at the bottom (p<0.001). OPU exposed for 40 seconds achieved higher mechanical properties than TET that was photo-activated for 10 seconds (p<0.001). The opacity of different bulk-fill RBCs changed differently during the polymerization; OPU became more opaque, whereas TET became more transparent. When exposed for their recommended times, the 2 mm thick RBCs that used Ivocerin or the APS photoinitiator system were adequately photo-activated using either the single or multiple emission peak LCUs (p=0.341). CONCLUSION: After 24 hours' storage, all the 2 mm thick RBCs photo-cured in 6 mm diameter molds achieved a bottom-to-top hardness ratio of at least 80% when their recommended exposure times were used. TET, when photo-activated for 10 seconds, achieved lower mechanical properties than OPU that had been photo-activated for 40 seconds. The change in opacity of the RBCs was different during photo-activation.

Impact of the Porosity from Incremental and Bulk Resin Composite Filling Techniques on the Biomechanical Performance of Root-Treated Molars.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effect of the porosity caused by incremental and bulk resin composite filling techniques using low- and high-viscosity composite resins on the biomechanical performance of root-treated molars. METHODS: Forty intact molars received standardized mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavity preparation, were root treated, and randomly divided into four groups with different filling techniques (n=10). The first involved two incremental filling techniques using VIT/Z350XT, a nanofilled composite resin (Filtek Z350XT, 3M ESPE) associated with a resin-modified glass ionomer cement, and resin-modified glass ionomer cement (RMGIC; Vitremer, 3M ESPE) for filling the pulp chamber. The second involved TPH/VIT, a microhybrid composite resin TPH3 Spectrum associated with Vitremer. The third and fourth involved two bulk-fill composite resins: SDR/TPH, a low-viscosity resin composite (Surefill SDR flow, Dentsply) associated with TPH3 Spectrum, and POST, a high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite (Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior, 3M ESPE). The volume of the porosity inside the restoration was calculated by micro-CT. The cusp deformation caused by polymerization shrinkage was calculated using the strain-gauge and micro-CT methods. The cusp deformation was also calculated during 100 N occlusal loading and loading to fracture. The fracture resistance and fracture mode were recorded. Data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey test. The fracture mode was analyzed by the χ2 test. The volume of the porosity was correlated with the cusp deformation, fracture resistance, and fracture mode (a=0.05). RESULTS: Incremental filling techniques associated with RMGIC resulted in a significantly higher porosity than that of both bulk-fill techniques. However, no significant difference was found among the groups for the fracture resistance, fracture mode, and cusp deformation, regardless of the measurement time and method used. No correlation was observed between the volume of the porosity and all tested parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The porosity of the restorations had no influence on the cuspal deformation, fracture resistance, or fracture mode. The use of the RMGIC for filling the pulp chamber associated with incremental composite resins resulted in similar biomechanical performance to that of the flowable or regular paste bulk-fill composite resin restorations of root-treated molars.

Effect of Restorative Protocol on Cuspal Strain and Residual Stress in Endodontically Treated Molars.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of the restorative protocol on cuspal strain, fracture resistance, residual stress, and mechanical properties of restorative materials in endodontically treated molars. METHODS: Forty-five molars received mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) Class II preparations and endodontic treatment followed by direct restorations using three restorative protocols: composite resin (CR) only (Filtek Supreme, 3M-ESPE), resin modified glass ionomer cement in combination with CR (Vitremer, 3M-ESPE in pulp chamber and Filtek Supreme in MOD cavity), conventional glass ionomer cement in combination with composite resin (CGI-CR) (Ketac Fil, 3M-ESPE in pulp chamber and Filtek Supreme in MOD cavity). Cuspal strain was measured using strain gauges, and fracture resistance was tested with an occlusal load. Elastic modulus (EM) and Vickers hardness (VH) of the restorative materials were determined at different depths using dynamic microhardness indentation. Curing shrinkage was measured using the strain gauge technique. The restorative protocols were also simulated in finite element analysis (FEA). The shrinkage strain, cuspal strain, EM, VH, and fracture resistance data were statistically analyzed using split-plot analysis of variance and Tukey test (p=0.05). Residual shrinkage stresses were expressed in modified von Mises equivalent stresses. RESULTS: Shrinkage strain values (in volume %) were Ketac Fil (0.08±0.01) < Vitremer (0.18±0.01) < Filtek Supreme (0.54±0.03). Cuspal strain was higher and fracture resistance was lower when using CR only compared with the techniques that used glass ionomer. The EM and VH of the materials in the pulp chamber were significantly lower for glass ionomer. The FEA showed that using CR only resulted in higher residual stresses in enamel and root dentin close to the pulp chamber than the combinations with glass ionomers (RMGI-CR and CGI-CR). CONCLUSIONS: The choice of restorative protocol significantly affected the biomechanical behavior of endodontically treated molars. Using glass ionomer to fill the pulp chamber is recommended when endodontically treated molars receive direct composite restorations because it reduces cuspal strain and increases fracture resistance.