Jelena Juloski1, Michele Carrabba2, Juan Manuel Aragoneses3, Leopoldo Forner4, Alessandro Vichi2, Marco Ferrari2. 1. Department of Dental Materials and Fixed Prosthodontics, Tuscan School of Dental Medicine, University of Florence and Siena, Italy. jelenajuloski@gmail.com 2. Department of Dental Materials and Fixed Prosthodontics, Tuscan School of Dental Medicine, University of Florence and Siena, Italy. 3. Universidad Europea de Madrid, Spain. 4. Department of Stomatology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the microleakage of Class II cavities restored with experimental low-shrinking resin composites proposed for bulk filling and to measure their microtensile bond strength (microTBS) to dentin and compare to those of previously marketed low-shrinkage composites. METHODS: Class II cavities (7 mm occluso-gingival height, 2 mm mesio-distal depth of the box, 4 mm occlusal depth, 4 mm bucco-lingual width) were prepared in 50 molars and randomly divided into five groups (n = 10), according to the material: SureFil SDR flow (SDR), Filtek Silorane (FS) and experimental materials (G-aenial Flo bulk fill, GF; G-aenial Universal Flo bulk fill, GUF; GC Kalore bulk fill, GK). Microleakage was separately assessed at enamel and dentin margins by scoring the depth of silver-nitrate penetration. Twenty teeth divided into five groups (n = 4) were selected for microTBS testing. The same materials as for microleakage assessment were placed in bulk to mid-coronal dentin. Microtensile beams were loaded in tension, and microTBS at failure was calculated in MPa. Microleakage and microTBS data were analyzed by ANOVA on ranks, followed Dunn's post hoc test (P< 0.05). RESULTS:Microleakage was not observed at the enamel interface in any of the groups. At the dentin interface, SDR recorded significantly higher microleakage than the other materials. microTBS of GF, GUF and GK did not differ among each other (33 +/- 12 MPa, 31 +/- 11 MPa, 30 +/- 9 MPa, respectively), while SDR (63 +/- 17 MPa) and FS (55 +/- 17MPa) achieved significantly higher microTBS values. No direct association between the sealing properties and the bond strength values was observed.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the microleakage of Class II cavities restored with experimental low-shrinking resin composites proposed for bulk filling and to measure their microtensile bond strength (microTBS) to dentin and compare to those of previously marketed low-shrinkage composites. METHODS: Class II cavities (7 mm occluso-gingival height, 2 mm mesio-distal depth of the box, 4 mm occlusal depth, 4 mm bucco-lingual width) were prepared in 50 molars and randomly divided into five groups (n = 10), according to the material: SureFil SDR flow (SDR), Filtek Silorane (FS) and experimental materials (G-aenial Flo bulk fill, GF; G-aenial Universal Flo bulk fill, GUF; GC Kalore bulk fill, GK). Microleakage was separately assessed at enamel and dentin margins by scoring the depth of silver-nitrate penetration. Twenty teeth divided into five groups (n = 4) were selected for microTBS testing. The same materials as for microleakage assessment were placed in bulk to mid-coronal dentin. Microtensile beams were loaded in tension, and microTBS at failure was calculated in MPa. Microleakage and microTBS data were analyzed by ANOVA on ranks, followed Dunn's post hoc test (P< 0.05). RESULTS: Microleakage was not observed at the enamel interface in any of the groups. At the dentin interface, SDR recorded significantly higher microleakage than the other materials. microTBS of GF, GUF and GK did not differ among each other (33 +/- 12 MPa, 31 +/- 11 MPa, 30 +/- 9 MPa, respectively), while SDR (63 +/- 17 MPa) and FS (55 +/- 17MPa) achieved significantly higher microTBS values. No direct association between the sealing properties and the bond strength values was observed.