This study aimed to evaluate certain physical properties including surface wear of a new experimental short fiber-reinforced flowable resin composite (SFRC) in comparison with different commercial flowable bulk fill resin composites (SDR, Tetric EvoFlow Bulk Fill, Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable and Estelite Bulk Fill Flow). The following properties were examined according to ISO standard: flexural strength, flexural modulus, fracture toughness, water sorption, volumetric shrinkage, and depth of cure. Degree of conversion (DC%) was determined by FTIR spectrometry. A wear test was conducted with 15000 chewing cycles using a dual-axis chewing simulator. Wear depth was measured by a three-dimensional (3D) noncontact optical profilometer. Scanning electron microscopy was used to evaluate the microstructure of SFRC. Data were statistically analyzed with analysis of variance ANOVA ( p = 0.05). SFRC exhibited the highest fracture toughness (2.8 MPa m 1/2 ) and flexural strength (146.5 MPa) values ( p < 0.05) and the greatest depth of cure (5 mm) and lowest wear depth (18.2 µm) among the flowable bulk fill materials tested. SDR showed the lowest volumetric shrinkage percentage (2.9%), while the other resin composites had comparable volumetric shrinkage values ( p > 0.05). The new short fiber-reinforced flowable resin composite differed significantly in its measured fracture toughness compared to the tested flowable bulk fill resin composites.

No abstract

BackgroundFiber reinforced composite (FRC) is a promising class of material that gives clinicians alternative treatment options. There are many FRC products available in the market based on either glass or polyethylene fiber type. The aim of this study was to present a comparison between glass and polyethylene fiber reinforced composites based on available literature review.Material and MethodsA thorough literature search, with no limitation, was done up to June 2017. The range of relevant publications was surveyed using PubMed and Google Scholar. From the search results, articles related to our search terms were only considered. An assessment of these articles was done by two individuals in order to include only articles directly compare between glass and polyethylene FRCs. The search terms used were “fiber reinforced dental composites” and “glass and polyethylene fibers in dentistry”.ResultsThe search provided 276 titles. Full-text analysis was performed for 29 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Most were laboratory-based research with various test specimen designs prepared according to ISO standard or with extracted teeth and only three articles were clinical studies. Most of studies (n=23) found superior characteristics of glass FRCs over polyethylene FRCs.ConclusionsSignificant reinforcement differences between commercial glass and polyethylene fiber reinforced composites were found. Key words:Fiber reinforced composite, glass fiber, polyethylene fiber.

Aim: The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the effects of different polishing protocols on the surface gloss (SG) of different commercial dental resin composites (RCs). Material and methods: A total of 147 block-shaped specimens (40 mm length  10 mm width  2 mm thick) were made from conventional RCs (G-aenial Ant. and Flo X), bulk-fill RC (Filtek Bulk Fill), fluoride-releasing RCs (BEAUTIFIL II, ACTIVA-Restorative) and discontinuous microfiberreinforced RCs (Alert and everX Flow). Each group was subdivided into seven subgroups (n ¼ 3), according to polishing protocol: Laboratory-machine polishing with different siliconcarbide paper grits (G1: 320) ! (G2: 800) ! (G3: 1200) ! (G4: 2000) ! (G5: 4000). Chairside-hand polishing using a series of Sof-Lex spiral (G6) and abrasive polishing points (G7). Glossmeter was used to determine the SG at 60 incidence angle. SG was measured before and after polishing. Three-dimensional (3 D) noncontact optical profilometer and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) analysis were performed. Data were analyzed using ANOVA (p ¼ .05). Results: Significant differences in SG (ranged 3-93 GU) were found according to the type of polishing protocol and RC (p < .05). Specimens polished with 4000 grit paper showed the highest SG (93 GU) values among all the groups tested. Conclusions: The tested chairside-hand polishing protocols presented lower SG values than laboratory-machine polishing (4000 silicon paper grit) and unpolished surfaces.

Purpose: By combining the increased toughness of a resin composite reinforced with discontinuous fibers and the surface wear resistance of a particulate filler composite (PFC), a bilayered composite technique was recently introduced. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the thickness of the overlaying PFC placed over a fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) core, on the fracture-behavior of direct crown restorations. Methods: Six groups of posterior crown restorations (n ¼ 8/group) were fabricated having a discontinuous FRC-core (everX Flow) and a layer of surface PFC (Essentia U) with various thicknesses (0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 mm), with the remaining thickness of the bilayered being 6 mm. Control groups were only made of PFC or FRC materials. Restorations were statically loaded until fracture. Failure-modes were visually examined. Data were analyzed using ANOVA (p ¼ .05) and regression analysis. Results: The regression analysis showed that by decreasing the thickness of PFC layer, the load bearing capacity of restorations increased linearly (R 2 ¼0.7909). ANOVA revealed that crown restorations made only from everX Flow composite had significantly higher load-bearing capacities (3990 ± 331 N) (p < .05) among all the groups tested. With regard to the failure-mode analysis, crowns that had a FRC core material of everX Flow revealed delamination of the PFC surface composite from the core. Crowns which were made only of PFC i.e. with no fiber reinforcement, showed a crushing-like fracture pattern. Conclusions: Restorations combining a thick FRC-core and a thin surface layer of PFC (0.5-1 mm), displayed promising performance related to fracture-behavior and load-bearing capacity.