The Effect of Different Intermediary Layer Materials Under Resin Composite Restorations on Volumetric Cuspal Deflection, Gap Formation, and Fracture Strength.

This study investigated the effect of different intermediary layer materials under class II mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) resin composite restorations on volumetric cuspal deflection, gap formation, and fracture strength. In total, 32 sound human maxillary premolars were used. After large, standardized Class II MOD cavities were prepared, a universal adhesive (Clearfil Universal Bond Quick, Kuraray) was applied. The premolars were randomly allocated into four groups according to different intermediary layer materials (n=8): Group Z250 (control)/micro-hybrid composite (Filtek Z250, 3M ESPE); Group EST/low-viscosity bulk-fill resin composite (Estelite Bulk Fill Flow, Tokuyama Dental Corp) + micro-hybrid composite; Group NOV/nanofiber-reinforced low-viscosity composite (NovaPro Flow, Nanova) + micro-hybrid composite; and Group RIB/polyethylene fiber [Ribbond, Ribbond Inc] + micro-hybrid composite. Distilled water was used for storage for 24 hours. Using microcomputed tomography (micro-CT), the teeth were scanned immediately after cavity preparation (T0), then 24 hours after restorative procedures (T1). Volumetric cuspal deflection in cubic millimeters (mm3) was analyzed on the palatal and buccal regions of each restoration individually at T0 and T1 scans. Gap formation (mm3) was evaluated to quantify the volume of black spaces at the tooth-resin interface on the T1 scan. After these scans, using a universal testing machine, the teeth were subjected to a fracture strength test (0.5 millimeters/minute [mm/min]). The fracture surfaces were analyzed with a stereomicroscope. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Dunn's tests (p< 0.05). No significant differences in volumetric cuspal deflection and fracture strength were detected for all tested groups (p>0.05). Group RIB exhibited significantly higher gap formation values in comparison with all other groups (p<0.05). Predominant failure mode was favorable.