Curing profile of bulk-fill resin-based composites

Li, Xin; Pongprueksa, Pong; Meerbeek, Bart Van; Munck, Jan De

doi:10.1016/j.jdent.2015.01.002

Cited by 130 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Table 4, a full 20 s of curing should yield a depth of cure slightly higher than 2 mm for EHD, between 4 and 5 mm with TEC and much higher than 6 mm with SDR. This finding is consistent with the results by Li et al 28 They used micro-Raman spectroscopy to examine degree of conversion of SDR and TEC after 20 of curing and reported that the effective depth of cure, which was defined as 90% of maximum degree of cure, to be 9.45 mm and 3.14 mm, respectively. If a relationship between the specimen thickness and the time needed to cure the composite can be established for each material and the irradiance of the light curing unit, it would be possible to calculate the curing depth of the material for a prescribed time of curing.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Comparing depth-dependent curing radiant exposure and time of curing of regular and flow bulk-fill composites

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of restoration depth on the curing time of a conventional and two bulk-fill composite resins by measuring microhardness and the respective radiosity of the bottom surface of the specimen was investigated. 1-, 3-and 5-mm thick washers were filled with Surefil SDR Flow-U (SDR), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill-IVA (TEC) or Esthet-X HD-B1 (EHD), and cured with Bluephase ® G2 for 40s. Additional 1-mm washers were filled with SDR, TEC or EHD, placed above the light sensor of MARC ® , stacked with pre-cured 1-, 3-or 5-mm washer of respective material, and cured for 2.5~60s to mimic 2-, 4-and 6-mm thick composite curing. The sensor measured the radiosity (E B ) at the bottom of specimen stacks. Vickers hardness (VH) was measured immediately at 5 locations with triplicate specimens. Nonlinear regression of VH vs E B by VH=α[1-exp(-E B /β)] with all thickness shows that the values of α, maximum hardness, are 21.6±1.0 kg/mm 2 for SDR, 38.3±0.6 kg/mm 2 for TEC and 45.3±2.6 kg/mm 2 for EHD, and the values of β, rate parameter, are 0.40±0.06 J/cm 2 for SDR, 0.77±0.04 J/cm 2 for TEC and 0.58±0.09 J/cm 2 for EHD. The radiosity of the bottom surface was calculated when the bottom surface of each material attained 80% of α of each material. The curing times for each material are in agreement with manufacturer recommendation for thickness. It is possible to estimate time needed to cure composite resin of known depth adequately by the radiosity and microhardness of the bottom surface.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Comparing depth-dependent curing radiant exposure and time of curing of regular and flow bulk-fill composites

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…4 The durability and performance of bulk-fill RBCs can be evaluated by characterization of their mechanical properties. 5 For instance, material hardness is a measure of degree of polymerization and resistance to surface wear. 6 Similarly, resistance to fracture and clinical failure of restorative materials reflect flexural and compressive strengths.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diametral Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength, and Surface Microhardness of Bioactive Bulk Fill Restorative

Alrahlah

2018

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim was to perform comparative analysis of bioactive, contemporary bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) and conventional glass-ionomer materials for flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and Vickers hardness number (VHN) in the presence of thermocycling. Materials and methods:Five restorative materials [Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill; smart dentin replacement (SDR) Flowable Material; Bioactive restorative material (ACTIVA Bulk Fill); Ketac Universal Aplicap; and GC Fuji II] were evaluated for DTS, FS, and VHN. Half the samples in each material group were thermocycled. The DTS was performed under compressive load at a cross-head speed of 1.0 mm/min. The FS was assessed by three-point bending test at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The VHN was determined using a Vickers diamond indenter at 50 gf load for 15 seconds. Differences in FS, DTS, and VHN were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc tests at α = 0.05 level of significance.Results: N-Ceram, ACTIVA, and SDR demonstrated the highest and comparable (p > 0.05) FS. The SDR had the highest DTS value (141.28 ± 0.94), followed by N-Ceram (136.61 ± 1.56) and ACTIVA (129.05 ± 1.78). Ketac had the highest VHN value before and after thermocycling. Conclusion:ACTIVA showed mechanical properties (FS and DTS) comparable with bulk-fill resin composite materials. ACTIVA showed potential for durability, as VHN was comparable post-thermocycling.Clinical significance: Bioactive materials showed acceptable DTS and FS values. However, hardness was compromised compared with included materials. ACTIVA Bulk Fill shows potential for dentin replacement but it needs to be covered with a surface-resistant restorative material. Further studies to improve surface characteristics of ACTIVA Bulk Fill are recommended.

show abstract

“…Um estudo que avaliou o perfil de polimerização dos compósitos Bulk Fill comprovou que estes podem ser fotoativados de modo efetivo em um único incremento de espessura de 4 mm, que foi a média de tamanho das amostras utilizadas 10 . Em uma pesquisa que analisou a deflexão das cúspides, foi comprovado outro benefício dos compósitos Bulk Fill, quando comparados aos convencionais: tais compósitos apresentaram redução da deflexão das cúspides 11 .…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Resistência de união de compósitos do tipo Bulk Fill: análise in vitro

Charamba

Meireles

Duarte

et al. 2017

Rev. odontol. UNESP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoIntrodução: A classe dos compósitos Bulk-Fill tem obtido popularidade com a promessa de ser fotopolimerizado efetivamente em camadas de até quatro milímetros, fato que contrasta com os dois milímetros requisitados para os compósitos convencionais para manutenção da adesividade da restauração. Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo foi analisar a resistência de união à dentina de restaurações confeccionadas com compósitos do tipo Bulk-Fill. Material e método: Foram utilizados 15 terceiros molares humanos, cuja superfície oclusal foi cortada e a dentina foi exposta. Esses elementos dentários foram divididos em três grupos conforme o material restaurador utilizado. O sistema adesivo usado foi o mesmo para todos os grupos. Posteriormente, os dentes restaurados foram cortados para originar palitos de aproximadamente 1 mm de largura, 1 mm de profundidade e 8 mm de altura, que foram fixados às garras do dispositivo de microtração. Foram utilizados dez palitos de cada dente, totalizando 50 palitos por grupo. Os dados de resistência de união à microtração foram expressos em megapascal (MPa). As fraturas foram analisadas em microscópio óptico. Os dados foram analisados através dos testes ANOVA e Tukey (p<0,05). Resultado: Os três compósitos estudados diferiram estatisticamente entre si (p<0,000). Os compósitos Bulk-Fill apresentaram resistências de união semelhantes e superiores ao convencional (p<0,000). A fratura mais encontrada foi a mista, em todos os grupos. Conclusão: Os compósitos Bulk-Fill apresentaram maiores valores de resistência de união com a técnica restauradora utilizada.Descritores: Resinas compostas; resistência à tração; dente molar. AbstractIntroduction: The class of the Bulk Fill composites has gotten popularity with the promise of been cured effectively of layers up to 4 mm, a fact with contrasts with the 2 mm required for the convencional composites for maintance of the restoration's adhesion. Objective: The aim of this study was evaluate the microtensile bond strength to dentine of restorations made with Bulk Fill composites. Material and method: 15 thirds molars teeth were utilized, whose occlusal layer was cut, exposing the teeth dentine. The teeth were divided in three groups according to the type of restoration materials. All groups were treated with the adhesive system Adper Single Bond 2. Subsequently they were cut in sticks with approximately 1 mm wide, 1 mm depth and 8 mm high, that were fixated at a universal microtensile maching. 10 sticks of each tooth were used in the experiment totaling 50 sticks per group. The data of bond strength microtensile were expressed in MPa. The failures mode was evaluated at an optical microscope. The Data were statistically analyzed through ANOVA and Tukey test (p<0.05). Result: The three composites studied differed statistically among themselves (p<0.000). The Bulk Fill composites had microtensile bond strength similar and higher than the convencional (p<0.000). The pattern failure mode found in all groups studied was the mixed. Conclusion: The Bulk Fill c...

show abstract

Curing profile of bulk-fill resin-based composites

Cited by 130 publications

References 29 publications

Comparing depth-dependent curing radiant exposure and time of curing of regular and flow bulk-fill composites

Comparing depth-dependent curing radiant exposure and time of curing of regular and flow bulk-fill composites

Diametral Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength, and Surface Microhardness of Bioactive Bulk Fill Restorative

Resistência de união de compósitos do tipo Bulk Fill: análise in vitro

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About