Mikrotvrdoća bulk-fill kompozitnih smola

Other literature type English OPEN
Kelić, Katarina ; Matić, Sanja ; Marović, Danijela ; Klarić, Eva ; Tarle, Zrinka (2016)
  • Publisher: Sestre Milosrdnice University hospital and Institute of Clinical Medical Research
  • Journal: Acta clinica Croatica (issn: 0353-9466, vol: 55)
  • Subject: Kompozitni materijali; Bulk-fill; Mikrotvrdoća | Composite resins; Bulk-fill; Microhardness
The aim of the study was to determine microhardness of high- and low-viscosity bulk-fill composite resins and compare it with conventional composite materials. Four materials of high-viscosity were tested, including three bulk-fills: QuiXfi l (QF), x-tra fil (XTF) and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TEBCF), while nanohybrid composite GrandioSO (GSO) served as control. The other four were low-viscosity composites, three bulk-fill materials: Smart Dentin Replacement (SDR), Venus Bulk Fill (VBF) and x-tra base (XB), and conventional control material X-Flow (XF). Composite samples (n=5) were polymerized for 20 s with Bluephase G2 curing unit. Vickers hardness was used to determine microhardness of each material at the surface, and at 2-mm and 4-mm depth. GSO on average recorded significantly higher microhardness values than bulk-fill materials (p<0.001). The low-viscosity composite XF revealed similar microhardness values as SDR, but signifi cantly lower than XB (p<0.001) and significantly higher than VBF (p<0.001). Microhardness of high-viscosity bulk-fill materials was lower than microhardness of the conventional composite material (GSO). Surface microhardness of low-viscosity materials was generally even lower. The microhardness of all tested materials at 4 mm was not different from their surface values. However, additional capping layer was a necessity for low-viscosity bulk-fill materials due to their low microhardness.
  • References (42)
    42 references, page 1 of 5

    1. Bowen R. Dental fi lling material comprising vinyl silane treated fuse silica and a binder consisting of the reaction product of Bis phenol and glycidyl acrylate. 1962; Patent No. 3. 066, 112.

    2. Civelek A, Ersoy M, L'Hoteliere E, Soyman M, Say EC. Polymerization shrinkage and microleakage in class II cavities of various resin composites. Oper Dent. 2003;28:635-42.

    3. Kwon Y, Ferracane J, Lee IB. Ef ect of layering methods, composite type, and fl owable liner on the polymerization shrinkage stress of light cured composites. Dent Mater. 2012;28:801-9. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.028

    4. Chikawa H, Inai N, Cho E, Kishikawa R, Otsuki M, Foxton RM, et al. Ef ect of incremental fi lling technique on adhesion of light-cured resin composite to cavity fl oor. Dent Mater J. 2006;25:503-8.

    5. Sakaguchi R, Douglas W, Peters M. Curing light performance and polymerization of composite restorative materials. J Dent. 1992;20:183-8.

    6. Park J, Chang J, Ferracane J, Lee IB. How should composite be layered to reduce shrinkage stress: incremental or bulk fi lling? Dent Mater. 2008;24:1501-5. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.013 with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. J Dent. 2003;31:437-44.

    8. Sarrett DC. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005;21:9-20.

    9. Ivoclar Vivadent. Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill Scientifi c Documentation. [Internet]. Schaan: Ivoclar Vivadent; 2013 [cited 2013 Jun 25]. Available from: http://www.ivoclarvivadent. com/en/products/restorative materials/composites/tetric-evoceram-bulk-fi ll.

    10. Par M, Gamulin O, Marovic D, Klaric E, Tarle Z. Raman spectroscopic assessment of degree of conversion of bulk-fi ll resin composites - changes at 24 hours post cure. Oper Dent. 2015;40:E92-101. doi: 10.2341/14-091-L

    11. Sakaguchi RL, Powers JM. Restorative Dental Materials. Philadelphia: Elsevier Mosby; 2012.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark