Penha Karla-Janilee-de Souza, Souza Ana-Ferreira, Dos Santos Marina-Jansen, Júnior Lauber-José Dos Santos-Almeida, Tavarez Rudys-Rodolfo-De Jesus, Firoozmand Leily-Macedo
DDS, MSc, PhD student, Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Maranhão (UFMA), São Luís, Maranhão, Brazil.
MSc student, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, SP, Brazil.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 Dec 1;12(12):e1131-e1138. doi: 10.4317/jced.57310. eCollection 2020 Dec.
The implementation of restorative procedures that guarantee success and optimize clinical time is the target of investigations in Restorative Dentistry. This study aimed to analyze the influence of sonic insertion of bulk-fill (BF) and conventional (C) resin composites on the microtensile bond-strength (µ-TBS) and cure depth (CD) of large and deep class I restorations.
Fifty-six healthy human premolars were selected and occlusal cavities (4 x 4 x 3 mm; factor C = 5) were prepared. TC - Tetric N-Ceram (BF), SF - SonicFill (BF), and Z350 - Filtek Z350 XT (C) composite resins were used to restore the cavities, using sonic (S) and non-sonic (NS) insertion techniques. A group restored with conventional incremental insertion (I) using Z350 XT resin was performed serving as a control. Teeth were prepared for microtensile bond-strength test (µ-TBS). And also, restoration depths of 1 and 4 mm were measured with an automatic microhardness indenter (50 g -15 s) to determine the CD. Results were evaluated using ANOVA, Scheffe, and Games-Howel posthoc test (α = 0.05).
Types of resins and insertion techniques present statistical differences for µ-TBS and CD ( ≤ 0.001). The µ-TBS was higher respectively for the groups SF > TC > Z350; however, the sonic insertion for SF and Z350 (I) did not present significant differences in µ-TBS. Higher microhardness values were observed on the surface (1mm). At a depth of 4 mm Z350 (I)> SF(S)> SF(NS)> TC(S/NS)> Z350(S/NS) (< 0.001). Pearson's Correlation of bond strength and base micro-hardness was significant ( ≤ 0.001), strong, and positive (0.955).
The influence of sonic insertion is material dependent, influenced only the microhardness of the SonicFill resin and did not interfere with the bond strength and cure depth of other bulk fill and conventional resin composite. Composite resins, dentin, hardness tests, tensile strength, Bulk-fill resins, sonic insertion.
实施能确保成功并优化临床时间的修复程序是口腔修复学研究的目标。本研究旨在分析大容量充填（BF）和传统（C）树脂复合材料的声波插入对Ⅰ类大而深的修复体的微拉伸粘结强度（µ-TBS）和固化深度（CD）的影响。
选取56颗健康人前磨牙，制备咬合面窝洞（4×4×3mm；因素C = 5）。使用TC - Tetric N - Ceram（BF）、SF - SonicFill（BF）和Z350 - Filtek Z350 XT（C）复合树脂，采用声波（S）和非声波（NS）插入技术修复窝洞。用Z350 XT树脂通过传统递增插入（I）方式修复一组作为对照。制备牙齿用于微拉伸粘结强度测试（µ-TBS）。此外，用自动显微硬度压头（50g - 15s）测量1mm和4mm的修复深度以确定CD。结果采用方差分析、谢费检验和Games - Howel事后检验进行评估（α = 0.05）。
树脂类型和插入技术在µ-TBS和CD方面存在统计学差异（≤0.001）。µ-TBS分别在SF > TC > Z350组中更高；然而，SF和Z350（I）的声波插入在µ-TBS方面无显著差异。在表面（1mm）观察到更高的显微硬度值。在4mm深度处，Z350（I）> SF（S）> SF（NS）> TC（S/NS）> Z350（S/NS）（<0.001）。粘结强度与基底显微硬度的皮尔逊相关性显著（≤0.001），呈强正相关（0.955）。
声波插入的影响取决于材料，仅影响SonicFill树脂的显微硬度，而不干扰其他大容量充填和传统树脂复合材料的粘结强度和固化深度。复合树脂、牙本质、硬度测试、拉伸强度、大容量充填树脂、声波插入。
