A Comparative Study of Shear Bond Strength of Bulk-Fill Composites, Packable and Flowable, as Well as Conventional Light-Curing Composite

Authors

  • Darabi, Farideh Dental Sciences Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
  • Davalloo, Reza Dental Sciences Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
  • Mahmudi, Shima Dental Sciences Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
  • Sadeghi, Yasaman Dental Sciences Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
  • Seyednejad, Somaye Department of Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
  • Tavangar, Maryam Dental Sciences Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.
Abstract:

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the Shear Bond Strength (SBS) of two bulk-fill composites versus a conventional resin composite. Materials and Methods: In this study, 60 sound extracted human premolars were selected and sectioned horizontally from one-third of the coronal crown to expose dentin using a low-speed cutting saw. The dentin bonding agent was applied to all specimens, then they were randomly divided into three groups based on their corresponding composites: Group I: Bulk-fill packable (x-tra fil, Voco, Germany); Group II: Bulk-fill flowable (x-tra base, Voco, Germany); and Group III: Conventional (Grandio, Voco, Germany). Subsequently, composite samples with a diameter of 2.5 mm and height of 4 mm were prepared. Following thermocycling (1500 cycles, 5°C -55°C), SBS testing was performed by a universal testing machine. Then, the specimens were examined for the type of fracture (adhesive, cohesive, or mixed) under a stereomicroscope at 20X magnification. Data were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc test in SPSS.  Results: The highest bond strength was observed in group III (52.99±6.07) and the lowest bond strength was observed in group II (49.11±4.86). There was no statistically significant difference between the packable and flowable groups in terms of SBS (P=0.19). Statistically significant differences were detected between group I and group III (P=0.005) as well as group II and group III (P=0.000). The majority of the fractures observed in all three groups were of adhesive type. Conclusion: Conventional composites produced significantly better results in comparison with bulk-fill composites as far as SBS was concerned. Therefore, it is advisable to continue the use of bulk-fill materials incrementally in dental treatment.

Upgrade to premium to download articles

Sign up to access the full text

Already have an account?login

similar resources

Comparing the Microleakage of Bulk-Fill (flowable, packable) Composite Restorations and Conventional Light-cured Composites

Introduction and aim: Bulk Fill composites have increased polymerization depth and their contraction stress, and cuspal deflection are reduced in comparison with conventional composites. Therefore, it is claimed that their microleakage is reduced. The aim of this study was to compare microleakage of (flowable and packable) Bulk Fill and conventional resin composites. Materials and Methods: Thi...

full text

Comparison of the Effect of Three LED Light Modes and Conventional QTH Curing Light on Shear Bond Strength of Composite to Dentin

  Objective: Shear bond strength is an important property inherent to the durability of tooth-colored restorative materials namely composite resins. It has been years that halogen light sources have been used for polymerization of composite resins. In recent years Light Emitting Diodes (LED) have been introduced for this purpose. With respect to their longer bulb life, needless of a filter and ...

full text

Microtensile bond strength of bulk-fill restorative composites to dentin

BACKGROUND To facilitate the easier placement of direct resin composite in deeper cavities, bulk fill composites have been introduced. The Mechanical stability of fillings in stress bearing areas restored with bulk-fill resin composites is still open to question, since long term clinical studies are not available so far. Thus, the objective of the study was to evaluate and compare the microtens...

full text

Push-Out Bond Strength of Restorations with Bulk-Fill, Flow, and Conventional Resin Composites

The aim of this study was to evaluate the bond strengths of composite restorations made with different filler amounts and resin composites that were photoactivated using a light-emitting diode (LED). Thirty bovine incisors were selected, and a conical cavity was prepared in the facial surface of each tooth. All preparations were etched with Scotchbond Etching Gel, the Adper Scotchbond Multipurp...

full text

Relation between conversion degree and cytotoxicity of a flowable bulk-fill and three conventional flowable resin-composites.

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study is to evaluate if the cytotoxic effects of the Surefil SDR flow, bulk fill flowable composite resin and three conventional flowable materials (Venus Diamond Flow, Filtex Supreme XTE Flowable and Enamel plus HRi Flow) correlated with the conversion degree (DC); hardness and depth of cure are also assessed. MATERIALS AND METHODS Disks of each materials--cured usi...

full text

Evaluationof Curing Depth of Bulk-Fill Resin Composite (A comparative study)

Received 4 November 2014 Accepted 1 December 2014 Abstract This study evaluated the depth of cure (DOC) of recently introduced resin composites for posterior use, bulk filled flowable composite (SureFil® SDR® flow DENTSPLY Caulk) at different depth. 30 specimens were prepared and divided into two Groups,Group 1: specimens with 2 mm depth, Group 2: specimens with 4mm depth. The composite specime...

full text

My Resources

Save resource for easier access later

Save to my library Already added to my library

{@ msg_add @}


Journal title

volume 6  issue 4

pages  115- 122

publication date 2018-01

By following a journal you will be notified via email when a new issue of this journal is published.

Keywords

No Keywords

Hosted on Doprax cloud platform doprax.com

copyright © 2015-2023