OBJECTIVE: To analyze the shrinkage stress, bonding interaction, and failure modes between different low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional resin composites produced by the same manufacturer or a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite used to restore the occlusal layer in posterior teeth. METHODS & MATERIALS: Three low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites were associated with the conventional resin composites made by the same manufacturers or with a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite, resulting in six groups (n=10). The bonding interaction between resin composites was tested by assessing the microshear bond strength (μSBS). The samples were thermocycled and were tested with 1-mm/min crosshead speed, and the failure mode was evaluated. The post-gel shrinkage (Shr) of all the resin composites was measured using a strain gauge (n=10). The modulus of elasticity (E) and the hardness (KHN) were measured using the Knoop hardness test. Two-dimensional finite element models were created for analyzing the stress caused by shrinkage and contact loading. The μSBS, Shr, E, and KHN data were analyzed using the Student t-test and one-way analysis of variance. The failure mode data were subjected to chi-square analysis (α=0.05). The stress distribution was analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: No significant difference was verified for μSBS between low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional or high-viscosity bulk fill composites in terms of restoring the occlusal layer (p=0.349). Cohesive failure of the low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites was the most frequent failure mode. The Shr, E, and KHN varied between low-viscosity and high-viscosity resin composites. The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites on the occlusal layer reduced the stress at the enamel interface on the occlusal surface. CONCLUSIONS: The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites as an occlusal layer for low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites to restore the posterior teeth can be a viable alternative, as it shows a similar bonding interaction to conventional resin composites as well as lower shrinkage stress at the enamel margin.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the shrinkage stress, bonding interaction, and failure modes between different low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional resin composites produced by the same manufacturer or a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite used to restore the occlusal layer in posterior teeth. METHODS & MATERIALS: Three low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites were associated with the conventional resin composites made by the same manufacturers or with a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite, resulting in six groups (n=10). The bonding interaction between resin composites was tested by assessing the microshear bond strength (μSBS). The samples were thermocycled and were tested with 1-mm/min crosshead speed, and the failure mode was evaluated. The post-gel shrinkage (Shr) of all the resin composites was measured using a strain gauge (n=10). The modulus of elasticity (E) and the hardness (KHN) were measured using the Knoop hardness test. Two-dimensional finite element models were created for analyzing the stress caused by shrinkage and contact loading. The μSBS, Shr, E, and KHN data were analyzed using the Student t-test and one-way analysis of variance. The failure mode data were subjected to chi-square analysis (α=0.05). The stress distribution was analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: No significant difference was verified for μSBS between low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional or high-viscosity bulk fill composites in terms of restoring the occlusal layer (p=0.349). Cohesive failure of the low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites was the most frequent failure mode. The Shr, E, and KHN varied between low-viscosity and high-viscosity resin composites. The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites on the occlusal layer reduced the stress at the enamel interface on the occlusal surface. CONCLUSIONS: The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites as an occlusal layer for low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites to restore the posterior teeth can be a viable alternative, as it shows a similar bonding interaction to conventional resin composites as well as lower shrinkage stress at the enamel margin.