Top

Clinical Oral Investigations

Published in:

01-02-2019 | Original Article

Sufficiency of curing in high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with enhanced opacity

Author: Nicoleta Ilie

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 2/2019

Abstract

Objectives

The study aims analyzing if improved opacity in modern high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites (BF-RBC) contradicts with the sufficiency of curing and to assess material’s tolerance to less ideal curing conditions.

Materials and methods

Simulated large cavities (10 × 6) mm were filled in one increment with three BF-RBCs (Filtek One, FO; Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk Fill, TEC-BF; SonicFill2, SF2). One central and two peripheral (4 mm apart from the center) micromechanical property line-profiles (HV, Vickers hardness; Y_HU, indentation modulus) were measured in 0.2-mm steps at 24 h post-polymerization (n = 6). Depth of cure (DOC) was calculated from the HV variation in depth. A scratch test (DOC_{scratch test}) estimated the tolerance in polymerization when simulating clinically relevant curing conditions (exposure distance up to 7 mm; centered and with a 3-mm offset placement of the LCU). Irradiance and spectral distribution of the used light curing unit (LCU) were assessed at various curing conditions.

Results

DOC varied among 3.6 mm (SF2, peripheral) and 5.7 mm (FO, central). The BF-RBC influences DOC stronger (p < 0.001, ηP² = 0.616) than the width (p < 0.001, ηP² = 0.398). Significant lower DOC (t test) was measured peripheral compared to center in all materials. Y_HU was more sensitive to the varied parameters as HV. DOC_{scratch test} varied among 2.4 mm (SF2, 3-mm offset, exposure distance 7 mm) and 3.9 mm (FO, center, 0 mm).

Conclusions

Whether opacity competes with DOC is material dependent. BF-RBCs tolerate small variations in LCU’s centricity better than variations in exposure distance.

Clinical relevance

The upper incremental thickness threshold of 4 or 5 mm was not reached in all BF-RBCs under simulated clinically relevant curing conditions.

Margeas RC (2015) Bulk-fill materials: simplify restorations, reduce chairtime. Compend Contin Educ Dent 36:e1–e4PubMed

McHugh LEJ, Politi I, Al-Fodeh RS, Fleming GJP (2017) Implications of resin-based composite (RBC) restoration on cuspal deflection and microleakage score in molar teeth: placement protocol and restorative material. Dent Mater 33:e329–e335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2017.06.001CrossRefPubMed

Ilie N, Bucuta S, Draenert M (2013) Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance. Oper Dent 38:618–625. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-395-lCrossRefPubMed

Peutzfeldt A, Muhlebach S, Lussi A, Flury S (2017) Marginal gap formation in approximal “bulk fill” resin composite restorations after artificial ageing. Oper Dent 43:180–189. https://doi.org/10.2341/17-068-lCrossRefPubMed

Sampaio CS, Chiu KJ, Farrokhmanesh E, Janal M, Puppin-Rontani RM, Giannini M, Bonfante EA, Coelho PG, Hirata R (2017) Microcomputed tomography evaluation of polymerization shrinkage of class I flowable resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 42:E16–E23. https://doi.org/10.2341/15-296-lCrossRefPubMed

Toh WS, Yap AU, Lim SY (2015) In vitro biocompatibility of contemporary bulk-fill composites. Oper Dent 40:644–652. https://doi.org/10.2341/15-059-lCrossRefPubMed

Alshali RZ, Salim NA, Sung R, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N (2015) Analysis of long-term monomer elution from bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites using high performance liquid chromatography. Dent Mater 31:1587–1598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.10.006CrossRefPubMed

Miletic V, Peric D, Milosevic M, Manojlovic D, Mitrovic N (2016) Local deformation fields and marginal integrity of sculptable bulk-fill, low-shrinkage and conventional composites. Dent Mater 32:1441–1451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.09.011CrossRefPubMed

Han SH, Sadr A, Tagami J, Park SH (2016) Internal adaptation of resin composites at two configurations: influence of polymerization shrinkage and stress. Dent Mater 32:1085–1094. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.06.005CrossRefPubMed

10.

Al Sunbul H, Silikas N, Watts DC (2016) Polymerization shrinkage kinetics and shrinkage-stress in dental resin-composites. Dent Mater 32:998–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2016.05.006CrossRefPubMed

11.

van Dijken JWV, Pallesen U (2017) Bulk-filled posterior resin restorations based on stress-decreasing resin technology: a randomized, controlled 6-year evaluation. Eur J Oral Sci 125:303–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.12351CrossRefPubMed

12.

McGuirk C, Hussain F, Millar BJ (2017) Survival of direct posterior composites with and without a bulk Fill Base. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 25:136–142. https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_01670McGuirk07CrossRefPubMed

13.

Bayraktar Y, Ercan E, Hamidi MM, Colak H (2017) One-year clinical evaluation of different types of bulk-fill composites. J Investig Clin Dent 8:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12210CrossRef

14.

Atabek D, Aktas N, Sakaryali D, Bani M (2017) Two-year clinical performance of sonic-resin placement system in posterior restorations. Quintessence Int 48:743–751. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.qi.a38855CrossRefPubMed

15.

Yazici AR, Antonson SA, Kutuk ZB, Ergin E (2017) Thirty-six-month clinical comparison of bulk fill and nanofill composite restorations. Oper Dent 42:478–485. https://doi.org/10.2341/16-220-cCrossRefPubMed

16.

Shortall AC, Palin WM, Burtscher P (2008) Refractive index mismatch and monomer reactivity influence composite curing depth. J Dent Res 87:84–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910808700115CrossRefPubMed

17.

Bucuta S, Ilie N (2014) Light transmittance and micro-mechanical properties of bulk fill vs. conventional resin based composites. Clin Oral Investig 18:1991–2000. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-013-1177-yCrossRefPubMed

18.

Ilie N, Stark K (2015) Effect of different curing protocols on the mechanical properties of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites. Clin Oral Investig 19:271–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1262-xCrossRefPubMed

19.

Ilie N, Stark K (2014) Curing behaviour of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites. J Dent 42:977–985. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.05.012CrossRefPubMed

20.

Shimokawa CA, Turbino ML, Harlow JE, Price HL, Price RB (2016) Light output from six battery operated dental curing lights. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl 69:1036–1042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2016.07.033CrossRefPubMed

21.

Ilie N, Luca BI (2018) Efficacy of modern light curing units in polymerizing peripheral zones in simulated large bulk-fill resin-composite fillings. Oper Dent. https://doi.org/10.2341/17-095-L

22.

DIN 50359-1:1997-10 (1997) Testing of metallic materials—universal hardness test—part 1: test method

23.

Watts DC, Amer O, Combe EC (1984) Characteristics of visible-light-activated composite systems. Br Dent J 156:209–215CrossRef

24.

ISO 4049:2009 (2009) Dentistry—polymer-based restorative materials

25.

Ilie N (2017) Impact of light transmittance mode on polymerisation kinetics in bulk-fill resin-based composites. J Dent 63:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.017CrossRefPubMed

26.

3M Oral Care (2016) 3M™ Filtek™ One Bulk Fill Restorative, Technical Product Profile. https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/1317671O/filtek-one-bulk-fill-technical-product-profile.pdf

27.

Joly GD, Abuelyaman AS, Fornof AR, Craig BD, Krepski LR, Moser WH, Yurt S, Oxman JD, Falsafi A (2016) Dental compositions comprising addition-fragmentation agents, United States Patent, Patent No.: US 9.414,996 B2

28.

Moad G, Rizzardo E, Thang SH (2008) Radical addition–fragmentation chemistry in polymer synthesis. Polymer 49:1079–1131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2007.11.020CrossRef

29.

Moad G, Chong YK, Postma A, Rizzardo E, Thang SH (2005) Advances in RAFT polymerization: the synthesis of polymers with defined end-groups. Polymer 46:8458–8468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2004.12.061CrossRef

30.

Schulz H, Burtscher P, Mädler L (2007) Correlating filler transparency with inorganic/polymer composite transparency. Compos A: Appl Sci Manuf 38:2451–2459CrossRef

31.

Ikemura K, Endo T (2010) A review of the development of radical photopolymerization initiators used for designing light-curing dental adhesives and resin composites. Dent Mater J 29:481–501CrossRef

32.

Moszner N, Fischer UK, Ganster B, Liska R, Rheinberger V (2008) Benzoyl germanium derivatives as novel visible light photoinitiators for dental materials. Dent Mater 24:901–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.11.004CrossRefPubMed

33.

Flury S, Hayoz S, Peutzfeldt A, Husler J, Lussi A (2012) Depth of cure of resin composites: is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials? Dent Mater 28:521–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.02.002CrossRefPubMed

Title: Sufficiency of curing in high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with enhanced opacity
Author: Nicoleta Ilie
Publication date: 01-02-2019
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2482-2

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Sufficiency of curing in high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites with enhanced opacity

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical relevance

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Influence of 2D vs 3D imaging and professional experience on dental implant treatment planning

Microleakage of composite crowns luted on CAD/CAM-milled human molars: a new method for standardized in vitro tests

Remineralization capacity of carious and non-carious white spot lesions: clinical evaluation using ICDAS and SS-OCT

Both operator and heat treatment determine the centring ability of Reciproc® files in vitro

Synthesis and application of triclosan methacrylate monomer in resin composites

Treatment outcome of bimaxillary surgery for asymmetric skeletal class II deformity