Objectives: To compare the degree of conversion (DC), depth of polymerization (DP), shrinkage stress (SS), flexural strength (FS), elastic modulus (EM), and bond strength (BS) of a low-viscosity bulk fill resin composite and a paste-like traditional composite.

Methods: Tetric Evo-Flow Bulk Fill (TBF) and Empress Direct (ED; Ivoclar Vivadent) composites were used. DC (%) and FS/EM (MPa/GPa) were evaluated in bar specimens (7×2×1 mm; n=10) using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and a three-point bending test in a universal testing machine (UTM), respectively. For DP and BS tests, conical cavities (n=10) were prepared in bovine dentin and restored with the composites. DP was analyzed by calculating the bottom-to-top surface microhardness ratio (BTHR), and BS (MPa) was determined by push-out testing in the UTM. SS (MPa) was measured for one increment of TBF and two increments of ED in a UTM attached to an extensometer (n=5). Data were analyzed using Student t-test and analysis of variance (α=0.05).

Results: TBF presented higher values than ED for DC (85.7±6.6% vs 54.2±4.9%) and BS (0.95±0.70 MPa vs 0.35±0.15 MPa). TBF values were lower than ED values for FS (76.6±16.8 MPa vs 144.9±24.1 MPa) and maximum SS (0.77±0.07 MPa vs 1.07±0.15 MPa). TBF and ED values were similar for BTHR (0.83±0.16 vs 0.84±0.08) and EM (11.5±2.8 GPa vs 12.5±2.6 GPa).

Conclusions: The physical and mechanical properties of TBF, a bulk fill resin composite, were similar or superior to those of ED, a conventional composite, with the exception of FS measurements.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2341/16-299-LDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bulk fill
16
resin composite
12
physical mechanical
8
low-viscosity bulk
8
fill resin
8
mpa
8
mpa tbf
8
tbf values
8
tbf
6
composite
5

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!