OBJECTIVES: This study measured resin/dentin bond strengths and evaluated gap formation at the pulpal floor of occlusal composite restorations using a flowable resin as a liner with either bulk or incremental placement of the restorative composite. METHODS: Class I occlusal preparations were made in 16 extracted molars, and were randomly divided into two groups for restoration using either One-Step adhesive (OS, BISCO) and Renew composite (RW, BISCO) or OptiBond SOLO adhesive (SOLO, Kerr) and Herculite XRV composite (XRV, Kerr). A flowable resin [AEliteFlo (AE, BISCO) or Revolution (RV, Kerr)] was applied as a liner in half of the specimens of each group. The lined and unlined groups were restored with composite cured in bulk, or cured in 1.5 mm increments. After 24 h in water, the teeth were sectioned into 0.7-mm thick slabs and were examined with an optical microscope (400 x) to determine the presence of internal resin-dentin gaps. The gap-free specimens were trimmed and were subjected to microtensile bond strength testing. Specimens that contained gaps had Knoop hardness of the restorative material measured. RESULTS: All incrementally filled restorations were well adapted to the pulpal floor but nearly all bulk-cured specimens had gaps between the flowable and the hybrid composites. The use of a flowable resin increased the bond strength of OS, but not SOLO. SIGNIFICANCE: The incremental technique prevented gap formation regardless of the use of a flowable resin. In contrast, the use of a flowable composite did not guarantee gap-free restorations or improved bond strength of resin to dentin in bulk-filled restorations.
OBJECTIVES: This study measured resin/dentin bond strengths and evaluated gap formation at the pulpal floor of occlusal composite restorations using a flowable resin as a liner with either bulk or incremental placement of the restorative composite. METHODS: Class I occlusal preparations were made in 16 extracted molars, and were randomly divided into two groups for restoration using either One-Step adhesive (OS, BISCO) and Renew composite (RW, BISCO) or OptiBond SOLO adhesive (SOLO, Kerr) and Herculite XRV composite (XRV, Kerr). A flowable resin [AEliteFlo (AE, BISCO) or Revolution (RV, Kerr)] was applied as a liner in half of the specimens of each group. The lined and unlined groups were restored with composite cured in bulk, or cured in 1.5 mm increments. After 24 h in water, the teeth were sectioned into 0.7-mm thick slabs and were examined with an optical microscope (400 x) to determine the presence of internal resin-dentin gaps. The gap-free specimens were trimmed and were subjected to microtensile bond strength testing. Specimens that contained gaps had Knoop hardness of the restorative material measured. RESULTS: All incrementally filled restorations were well adapted to the pulpal floor but nearly all bulk-cured specimens had gaps between the flowable and the hybrid composites. The use of a flowable resin increased the bond strength of OS, but not SOLO. SIGNIFICANCE: The incremental technique prevented gap formation regardless of the use of a flowable resin. In contrast, the use of a flowable composite did not guarantee gap-free restorations or improved bond strength of resin to dentin in bulk-filled restorations.
Authors: Brad Strober; Analia Veitz-Keenan; Julie Ann Barna; Abigail G Matthews; Donald Vena; Ronald G Craig; Frederick A Curro; Van P Thompson Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Nancy N Maserejian; Peter Shrader; Felicia L Trachtenberg; Russ Hauser; David C Bellinger; Mary Tavares Journal: Pediatr Dent Date: 2014 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.874
Authors: Nancy N Maserejian; Peter Shrader; Olivia A Brown; Felicia L Trachtenberg; Jennifer Soncini; Russ Hauser; Bruce J Shenker Journal: Int J Paediatr Dent Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 3.455