Assessment of internal porosities for different placement techniques of bulk-fill resin-based composites: a micro-computed tomography study.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare the porosity of different bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) placement techniques to the conventional incremental technique using microcomputed tomography (μ-CT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Occlusal cavities were prepared on extracted human molars, divided into five groups based on the placement technique (n = 10/group). Techniques examined were Monoblock-two-step (SureFil SDR flow + Ceram.X), Monoblock-two-step (Tetric EvoFlow Bulk-Fill + Tetric EvoCeram Bulk-Fill), Monoblock-one-step (Tetric EvoCeram Bulk-Fill), Monoblock with sonic activation (SonicFill2), and incremental technique (Filtek Z250). μ-CT scanning (SkyScan, Bruker, Belgium) assessed the number, volume of closed pores, and total porosity. Analysis of variance on ranks was used (Student-Newman-Keuls method and Mann-Whitney rank-sum test), to determine the significance of RBC viscosity and the sonication placement technique. The Spearman correlation method assessed the correlation between porosity characteristics (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

The SonicFill2 presented a higher number of closed pores than the other groups (p < 0.05). The overall porosity within the restoration seemed greater in this order: Filtek Z250 > SonicFill2 > Tetric EvoFlow Bulk-Fill + Tetric EvoCeram Bulk-Fill > Tetric EvoCeram Bulk-Fill > SureFil SDR Flow + Ceram.X. Sonication was associated with increased number (p = 0.005) and volume (p = 0.036) of closed pores. A strong correlation was observed between the number and volume of closed pores (R = 0.549, p < 001).

CONCLUSIONS

The monoblock technique with sonic activation showed significantly more internal porosity than the other placement techniques. Sonication during application contributed to the higher number and volume of closed pores than the passive bulk-fill application.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Using bulk-fill materials enhances efficiency, yet void formation remains an issue, depending on viscosity and active/passive delivery of materials. Clinicians must familiarize themselves with effective placement techniques to reduce void formation and optimizing treatment outcomes.