Fahad Alkhudhairy1. 1. Department of Restorative Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, e-mail: dr_fahad9@outlook.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the wear resistance of four bulk-fill composite resin restorative materials cured using high- and low-intensity lights. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four samples were prepared from each composite resin material (Tetric N-Ceram, SonicFill, Smart Dentin Replacement, Filtek Bulk-Fill) resulting in a total of 96 samples; they were placed into a mold in a single increment. All of the 96 samples were cured using the Bluephase N light curing unit for 20 seconds. Half of the total specimens (n = 48) were light cured using high-intensity output (1,200 mW/cm2), while the remaining half (n = 48) were light cured using low-intensity output (650 mW/cm2). Wear was analyzed by a three-dimensional (3D) noncontact optical profilometer (Contour GT-I, Bruker, Germany). Mean and standard deviation (SD) of surface loss (depth) after 120,000 cycles for each test material was calculated and analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a significance level at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The least mean surface loss was observed for SonicFill (186.52 urn) cured using low-intensity light. No significant difference in the mean surface loss was observed when comparing the four tested materials with each other without taking the curing light intensity into consideration (p = 0.352). A significant difference in the mean surface loss was observed between SonicFill cured using high-intensity light compared with that cured using low-intensity light (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A higher curing light intensity (1,200 mW/cm2) had no positive influence on the wear resistance of the four bulk-fill composite resin restorative materials tested compared with lower curing light intensity (650 mW/cm2). Furthermore, SonicFill cured using low-intensity light was the most wear-resistant material tested, whereas Tetric N-Ceram cured using high-intensity light was the least wear resistant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The wear resistance was better with the newly introduced bulk-fill composite resins under low-intensity light curing.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the wear resistance of four bulk-fill composite resin restorative materials cured using high- and low-intensity lights. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four samples were prepared from each composite resin material (TetricN-Ceram, SonicFill, Smart Dentin Replacement, Filtek Bulk-Fill) resulting in a total of 96 samples; they were placed into a mold in a single increment. All of the 96 samples were cured using the Bluephase N light curing unit for 20 seconds. Half of the total specimens (n = 48) were light cured using high-intensity output (1,200 mW/cm2), while the remaining half (n = 48) were light cured using low-intensity output (650 mW/cm2). Wear was analyzed by a three-dimensional (3D) noncontact optical profilometer (Contour GT-I, Bruker, Germany). Mean and standard deviation (SD) of surface loss (depth) after 120,000 cycles for each test material was calculated and analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a significance level at p < 0.05. RESULTS: The least mean surface loss was observed for SonicFill (186.52 urn) cured using low-intensity light. No significant difference in the mean surface loss was observed when comparing the four tested materials with each other without taking the curing light intensity into consideration (p = 0.352). A significant difference in the mean surface loss was observed between SonicFill cured using high-intensity light compared with that cured using low-intensity light (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: A higher curing light intensity (1,200 mW/cm2) had no positive influence on the wear resistance of the four bulk-fill composite resin restorative materials tested compared with lower curing light intensity (650 mW/cm2). Furthermore, SonicFill cured using low-intensity light was the most wear-resistant material tested, whereas TetricN-Ceram cured using high-intensity light was the least wear resistant. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The wear resistance was better with the newly introduced bulk-fill composite resins under low-intensity light curing.