| Literature DB >> 35160848 |
Danijela Marovic1, Matej Par1, Matea Macan1, Nikolina Klarić2, Iva Plazonić1, Zrinka Tarle1.
Abstract
This study evaluated the behavior of a new generation of bulk-fill resin composites after prolonged exposure to an aqueous environment and accelerated aging in ethanol. Six bulk-fill materials were tested (Tetric PowerFill, Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Fill-Up!, Tetric PowerFlow, SDR Plus Bulk Fill Flowable) and compared to two conventional reference materials (Tetric EvoCeram and Tetric EvoFlow). Flexural strength, modulus, and Weibull parameters were examined at three time points: 1 day, 30 days, and 30 days followed by ethanol immersion. Degree of conversion after 30 days, water sorption, and solubility up to 90 days were also investigated. Filtek One Bulk Fill had the highest flexural strength and modulus among the tested materials, followed by Tetric PowerFill and SDR plus. Flexural strength and modulus of high-viscosity bulk-fill materials showed higher stability after accelerated aging in ethanol compared to their low-viscosity counterparts and reference materials. After 30 days, the degree of conversion was above 80% for all tested materials. Dual-cure material Fill-Up! was the best-cured material. The water sorption was highest for Fill-Up!, Filtek One Bulk Fill Restorative, and Tetric EvoFlow, while solubility was highest for Tetric EvoCeram. After aging in water and ethanol, new generation high-viscosity bulk-fill materials showed better mechanical properties than low-viscosity bulk-fill and conventional composites under extended light curing conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Weibull analysis; aging; bulk-fill; composite; degree of conversion; ethanol; flexural modulus; flexural strength; solubility; water sorption
Year: 2022 PMID: 35160848 PMCID: PMC8839328 DOI: 10.3390/ma15030902
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Materials used in the study and the composition as provided by their respective manufacturers.
| Type | Name | Organic Matrix | Filler Mass/ | Manufacturer- |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High- | Tetric® PowerFill | Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, UDMA, PBPA, DCP, | 76–77/ | 3 s with 2700–3300 mW/cm2 |
| 3M™ Filtek™ One Bulk Fill Restorative | AUDMA, diurethane-DMA, 1,12-dodecan-DMA | ~ 76.5/ | * 20 s with 1000–2000 mW/cm2 | |
| Tetric EvoCeram® Bulk Fill | Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, UDMA | 76–77/ | 10 s with ≥1000 mW/cm2 | |
| Tetric EvoCeram® | Bis-GMA, UDMA, Bis-EMA | 75–76/ | 10 s with ≥1000 mW/cm2 | |
| Medium-viscosity (dual-cure) | Fill-Up! | methacrylates | ~65/ | 5 s with 1600 mW/cm2 |
| Low- | Tetric® PowerFlow | Bis-GMA, Bis-EMA, UDMA, DCP | 68.2/ | 3 s with 2700–3300 mW/cm2 |
| SDR® Plus Bulk Fill Flowable | modified UDMA, TEGDMA, dimethacrylate, trimethacrylate resins | 70.5/ | 20 s with ≥550 mW/cm2 | |
| Tetric EvoFlow® | Bis-GMA, UDMA, decandiol DMA | 57.5/ | 10 s with ≥1000 mW/cm2 |
Bis-GMA: bisphenol A-diglycidyl dimethacrylate; Bis-EMA: ethoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate; DCP: tricyclodecane–dimethanol dimethacrylate; UDMA: urethane dimethacrylate; AUDMA: aromatic dimethacrylate; DMA: dimethacrylate; PBPA: propoxylated bisphenol A dimethacrylate; TEGDMA: triethylene glycol dimethacrylate. * for a LED curing unit, 4 mm layer on posterior teeth, except for class II and core build-up.
Figure 1Flow chart of the experiments.
Figure 2Flexural strength (MPa) of tested materials. Equal letters represent statistically homogeneous groups for a particular time point. Parentheses indicate statistically similar groups for a particular material. Dashed parentheses indicate statistically homogeneous groups within the same material, which are not similar to the column in between (in cases where the time dependence is not monotonous), p < 0.05.
Figure 3Flexural modulus (GPa) values for materials tested according to ISO 4049. Equal letters represent statistically homogeneous groups for a particular time point. Parentheses indicate statistically similar groups for each material (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Weibull plots for the analysis of material reliability after artificial aging. Triangle, cirlcle and square represent individual time points.
Figure 5Comparison of the degree of conversion values (%) for tested materials. All pairs (0 mm vs. 2 mm) were statistically similar. Lowercase letters indicate statistically homogeneous groups at 0 mm, while uppercase letters indicate homogeneous groups at 2 mm (p < 0.05).
Figure 6Comparison of water sorption and solubility of tested materials. Uppercase letters indicate statistically similar sorption values, while lowercase letters indicate statistically similar solubility values (p < 0.05).