Ali Alrahlah1. 1. Department of Restorative Dental Science, King Saud University Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Phone: +00966114678304, e-mail: aalrahlah@ksu.edu.sa.
Abstract
AIM: The aim was to perform comparative analysis of bioactive, contemporary bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) and conventional glass-ionomer materials for flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and Vickers hardness number (VHN) in the presence of thermocycling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five restorative materials [Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill; smart dentin replacement (SDR) Flowable Material; Bioactive restorative material (ACTIVA Bulk Fill); Ketac Universal Aplicap; and GC Fuji II] were evaluated for DTS, FS, and VHN. Half the samples in each material group were ther-mocycled. The DTS was performed under compressive load at a cross-head speed of 1.0 mm/min. The FS was assessed by three-point bending test at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The VHN was determined using a Vickers diamond indenter at 50 gf load for 15 seconds. Differences in FS, DTS, and VHN were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc tests at a = 0.05 level of significance. RESULTS: N-Ceram, ACTIVA, and SDR demonstrated the highest and comparable (p > 0.05) FS. The SDR had the highest DTS value (141.28 ± 0.94), followed by N-Ceram (136.61 ± 1.56) and ACTIVA (129.05 ± 1.78). Ketac had the highest VHN value before and after thermocycling. CONCLUSION: ACTIVA showed mechanical properties (FS and DTS) comparable with bulk-fill resin composite materials. ACTIVA showed potential for durability, as VHN was comparable post-thermocycling. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Bioactive materials showed acceptable DTS and FS values. However, hardness was compromised compared with included materials. ACTIVA Bulk Fill shows potential for dentin replacement but it needs to be covered with a surface-resistant restorative material. Further studies to improve surface characteristics of ACTIVA Bulk Fill are recommended.
AIM: The aim was to perform comparative analysis of bioactive, contemporary bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) and conventional glass-ionomer materials for flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and Vickers hardness number (VHN) in the presence of thermocycling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five restorative materials [Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill; smart dentin replacement (SDR) Flowable Material; Bioactive restorative material (ACTIVA Bulk Fill); Ketac Universal Aplicap; and GC Fuji II] were evaluated for DTS, FS, and VHN. Half the samples in each material group were ther-mocycled. The DTS was performed under compressive load at a cross-head speed of 1.0 mm/min. The FS was assessed by three-point bending test at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The VHN was determined using a Vickers diamond indenter at 50 gf load for 15 seconds. Differences in FS, DTS, and VHN were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc tests at a = 0.05 level of significance. RESULTS:N-Ceram, ACTIVA, and SDR demonstrated the highest and comparable (p > 0.05) FS. The SDR had the highest DTS value (141.28 ± 0.94), followed by N-Ceram (136.61 ± 1.56) and ACTIVA (129.05 ± 1.78). Ketac had the highest VHN value before and after thermocycling. CONCLUSION: ACTIVA showed mechanical properties (FS and DTS) comparable with bulk-fill resin composite materials. ACTIVA showed potential for durability, as VHN was comparable post-thermocycling. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Bioactive materials showed acceptable DTS and FS values. However, hardness was compromised compared with included materials. ACTIVA Bulk Fill shows potential for dentin replacement but it needs to be covered with a surface-resistant restorative material. Further studies to improve surface characteristics of ACTIVA Bulk Fill are recommended.