In vitro wear resistance of conventional and flowable composites containing various filler types after thermomechanical loading.

Objective: To comparatively assess the wear resistance of conventional and flowable composites containing different filler types using thermomechanical chewing simulation.

Materials And Methods: Six different composite resin materials were used: a conventional and flowable composite from each of three manufacturers respectively classified by different filler characterizations: (1), a nanohybrid conventional (G-aenial Posterior, GC) and flowable (G-aenial Universal Injectable, GC), (2) a nanofilled conventional (Filtek One Bulk-fill Restorative, 3M) and flowable (Filtek Ultimate Flow, 3M), and submicron-filled conventional (Estelite Posterior Quick, Tokuyama) and flowable (Estelite Bulk-Fill Flow, Tokuyama). The buccal surfaces of extracted human premolars were planarly abraded and used as control (n = 12).