Effects of application method on shrinkage vectors and volumetric shrinkage of bulk-fill composites in class-II restorations.
Bulk-fill resin composites
Cavity boundaries
Class-II restoration
Flowable liner
Shrinkage vectors
Volumetric polymerization shrinkage
Journal
Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials
ISSN: 1879-0097
Titre abrégé: Dent Mater
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8508040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2022
01 2022
Historique:
received:
17
06
2021
revised:
10
10
2021
accepted:
29
10
2021
pubmed:
28
11
2021
medline:
1
4
2022
entrez:
27
11
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Upon initial proximal wall construction, the favorable C-factor of class-II cavities may become unfavorable. This study investigated the application method on bulk-fill resin composite polymerization shrinkage. Occluso-proximal class-II cavities were prepared in 40 molars and bonded with a self-etch adhesive (Adhese Universal). The study groups varied according to the resin composite application: group-1: bulk application, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TBF); group-2: proximal wall construction (TBF) and occlusal cavity filling (TBF); group-3: thin flowable liner layer, Tetric EvoFlow Bulk Fill (TEF) and bulk filling (TBF); group-4: flowable liner (TEF), proximal wall (TBF), occlusal cavity (TBF); and group-5: bulk application, SDR (3 mm) and capping layer (TBF, 1 mm). Each resin composite increment was scanned twice using micro-CT (uncured, cured 40 s) at a resolution of 16 µm. Shrinkage vectors and volumetric polymerization shrinkage were evaluated and statistically analyzed (one-way ANOVA). SEM images were used to investigate the tooth-restoration interface. Shrinkage vectors differed significantly among the groups and were greatest in gp5-fl/SDR (47.6 µm), followed by gp1-TBF (23.8 µm) and least in gp5-fl/SDR+TBF (11.1 µm). Volumetric shrinkage varied significantly with the use of SDR (gp5-fl/SDR: 2.6%) and TEF (gp4-fl/TEF: 2.5%) to TBF (gp4-fl/TEF+wl/TBF: 0.6%) in the incremental application. Building a proximal resin composite wall yielded smaller shrinkage vectors than the bulk application. Applying a thin flowable liner decreased the shrinkage vectors, even more when building a proximal wall. A thin flowable liner is recommended when building a proximal resin composite wall.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34836696
pii: S0109-5641(21)00307-9
doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2021.10.013
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Composite Resins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
79-93Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of interest The authors—Dalia Kaisarly, Ruth Langenegger, Friederike Litzenburger, Katrin Heck, Moataz El Gezawi, Peter Rösch, and Karl-Heinz Kunzelmann—declare that they have no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.