Cervical Interfacial Bonding Effectiveness of Class II Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Resin Composite Restorations

Kaisarly, Dalia; Michna, Agata; ArRejaie, Aws S.; Bader, DL Dan; Gezawi, Moataz El

doi:10.2341/14-152-l

Cited by 43 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is hypothesized that interactions between the monomers of the adhesive and the composites were improved within each cavity. Microtensile bond strength study has been reported to effectively and reliably discriminate between adhesive bonding systems (21). Additionally, microtensile bond strength studies have also stated correlations between retention and many influencing factors, such as the diameter of the stick, the type of testing device, trimming into an hourglass shape, the handling of pretest failures, and the artificial aging technique (22).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microtensile Bond Strength and Microhardness of Composite Resin Restorations Using a Sonic-Resin Placement System

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of applying sonic energy on microtensile bond strength and microhardness after the restoration process. A total of 40 human third molars were extracted. Class II cavities were prepared and restored with composite SonicFill or Filtek Z350 XT with and without the application of sonic energy. After the teeth were stored in water for 24 h, the teeth were sectioned into sticks (1.0 mm 2 ) and subjected to tensile testing. For a depth Knoop hardness test, the samples were cut and indentations were made sequentially from the surface of the samples to the bottom of the samples in three intervals of 1 mm each. The samples were then subjected to a load of 50 g for 10 s. The results from the tensile (factors: placement system and composite) and hardness (factors: placement system, composite and depth) tests were subjected to the Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test, followed by analysis of variance and Tukey's test (5% significance). For the placement system factor, higher bond strength was observed for the cavities that were restored with sonic energy (p < 0.001). For depth Knoop hardness, the hardness at 1 mm depth was significantly greater than that at 3 mm depth just for the restorations with Filtek Z350 XT composite without the application of sonic energy. Therefore, the use of sonic energy during the restorative process improved bonding, yet it did not markedly affect the depth hardness for both composites.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microtensile Bond Strength and Microhardness of Composite Resin Restorations Using a Sonic-Resin Placement System

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The composition of bulk‐fill resin composites depend on their strategies, a lower filler content makes the resin more flowable . Apart from facilitating the placement of deep composite restorations, bulk‐fill composites also were found to provide better cervical interfacial quality and similar marginal performance during bulk‐fill versus incremental‐fill Class II composite restorations . As more attention were applied to the bulk‐fill composites, exploring the clinical benefits of bulk‐fill composites seems to be significant…”

Section: Composite System Classification Of Dental Compositesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and status of resin composite as dental restorative materials

Zhou

Huang

et al. 2019

J of Applied Polymer Sci

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental composites are comprised of a polymerizable matrix and reinforcing fillers that can be hardened into a solid restoration in the prepared tooth cavity. Composites are becoming increasingly popular due to their esthetics and improved mechanical and physical properties. However, dental composites still encounter several problems, mainly secondary (recurrent) caries, restoration fracture, excessive wear, marginal degradation, and tooth sensitivity. Therefore, extensive efforts are underway to improve the composite compositions and microstructure, and enhance their clinical performance and longevity. Relying on advances in materials science and technology, dental composites have been continuously improved and their clinical applications have been expanded. In this review article, the development of dental composites was summarized, including compositional changes, performance improvements in key areas, current research hot spots, and outlook for future direction. The intention is to provide a review of the history and development of dental composites with a discussion of strategies on addressing the current challenges facing dental composites. In addition, this review will provide a better understanding of dental composites and their properties for the practicing clinicians, to contribute to improving the quality of composite restorations. The review of literature indicates that while current composites are generally bio‐inert and can replace the missing tooth structure, future composites should be bioactive and therapeutic to inhibit caries, modulate biofilms, and protect the surrounding tooth structures, in order to increase the restoration longevity. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2019, 136, 48180.

show abstract

“…With the advancement of dental materials and clinical techniques, composites have become the most widely used direct restorative materials 3) . The polymerization of resin-based composites generates stress due to contraction 4,5) , which affects marginal integrity. To avoid clinical consequences such as postoperative sensitivity, marginal discoloration, dental microcracking, gap formation, and pulpal irritation, the incremental layering technique is recommended for placing the composite in a cavity 2,[6][7][8] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marginal integrity of flowable and packable bulk fill materials used for class II restorations —A systematic review and meta-analysis of <i>in vitro</i> studies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review evaluates the marginal integrity of flowable and packable bulk fill composite materials placed in class II cavities. Electronic databases inclusive of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched without restriction to date. The titles and abstracts of publications gathered from database searches were screened by reviewers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. From as initial yield of 142 articles ten studies were subject to qualitative analysis. The authors emphasized that marginal integrity in enamel and dentin does not significantly differ between flowable and packable bulk fill composites used for class II restorations. Moreover, their marginal integrity was comparable to conventional resin composites with incremental techniques. The adhesive system used with a total etch technique and assessed margin located in enamel resulted in better marginal integrity.

show abstract

Cervical Interfacial Bonding Effectiveness of Class II Bulk Versus Incremental Fill Resin Composite Restorations

Cited by 43 publications

References 34 publications

Microtensile Bond Strength and Microhardness of Composite Resin Restorations Using a Sonic-Resin Placement System

Microtensile Bond Strength and Microhardness of Composite Resin Restorations Using a Sonic-Resin Placement System

Development and status of resin composite as dental restorative materials

Marginal integrity of flowable and packable bulk fill materials used for class II restorations —A systematic review and meta-analysis of <i>in vitro</i> studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About