Oper Dent. 2020 Mar/Apr;45(2):E43-E56. doi: 10.2341/17-367-L. Epub 2019 Nov 21.
This study tested the fracture resistance of capped and uncapped bulk-fill composite restorations and compared them to a conventional composite. Also, the effect of different radiant exposure was investigated.
Flowable and high-viscosity bulk-fill composites (SureFil SDR, Filtek Bulk-Fill Posterior, and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill) and a nanohybrid resin composite (Filtek Z350 XT) were used. Standardized class II cavities were prepared on extracted premolars, and different restoration protocols were used. In protocol 1 (control), restoration was applied using a layering technique; in protocol 2, restoration was applied in bulk with a capping layer; in protocol 3, restoration was applied in bulk without a capping layer; and in protocol 4, restoration was applied in bulk without a capping layer, and the light curing time was extended. After thermocycling, the restorations were examined for marginal gaps and then subjected to the fracture resistance test using a universal testing machine. Statistical analysis was carried out using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by one-way ANOVA at a significance level of = 0.05.
A statistically significant difference in the fracture resistance of the tested materials and protocols was detected. Filtek Bulk-Fill Posterior achieved the highest fracture resistance values regardless of the protocol used, and its results were comparable to those of Filtek Z350. SDR and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill achieved their highest strengths when a capping layer was added. Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill showed improvement in fracture resistance with extended light curing, while SDR and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill achieved similar results with the addition of a capping layer. The uncapped bulk-fill group showed more gap-free margins than the capped group.
The new high-viscosity bulk-fill composite restorations seem to have adequate fracture resistance. However, the results are material dependent, and some materials perform better with a capping layer and extended light curing.
本研究测试了有顶和无顶块状填充复合修复体的抗折强度,并将其与传统复合树脂进行比较。同时,还研究了不同辐射暴露的影响。
使用了流动性和高粘度块状填充复合材料(SureFil SDR、Filtek Bulk-Fill Posterior 和 Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill)和纳米复合树脂复合材料(Filtek Z350 XT)。在离体前磨牙上制备标准的 II 类洞,并使用不同的修复方案。在方案 1(对照组)中,采用分层技术进行修复;在方案 2 中,采用块状填充并加一层顶;在方案 3 中,采用块状填充无顶;在方案 4 中,采用块状填充无顶,并延长光固化时间。热循环后,检查修复体的边缘间隙,然后使用万能试验机进行抗折强度测试。采用双因素方差分析(ANOVA)进行统计分析,然后在显著性水平 = 0.05 时进行单向方差分析。
测试材料和方案的抗折强度存在显著差异。无论使用哪种方案,Filtek Bulk-Fill Posterior 均获得了最高的抗折强度值,其结果与 Filtek Z350 相当。SDR 和 Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill 加顶时获得了最高的强度。Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill 延长光固化时间可提高抗折强度,而 SDR 和 Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-Fill 加顶时可获得相似的结果。无顶块状填充组的边缘间隙比有顶组更少。
新型高粘度块状填充复合修复体具有足够的抗折强度。然而,结果取决于材料,一些材料加顶和延长光固化后性能更好。