Comparison of microleakage between bulk-fill flowable and nanofilled resin-based composites.

Q2 Medicine
Eman I AlSagob, David N Bardwell, Ala O Ali, Samer G Khayat, Paul C Stark
{"title":"Comparison of microleakage between bulk-fill flowable and nanofilled resin-based composites.","authors":"Eman I AlSagob,&nbsp;David N Bardwell,&nbsp;Ala O Ali,&nbsp;Samer G Khayat,&nbsp;Paul C Stark","doi":"10.1556/1646.10.2018.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>The objective was to compare the marginal leakage (silver nitrate uptake) of nanohybrid resin-based composite (RBC) and two bulk-fill flowable RBCs with specific clinical protocols.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Four experimental groups of RBC were investigated including conventional composite Filtek™ Supreme in 2 mm increment (FS2), Filtek™ Supreme in 4 mm increment (FS4), Filtek™ Supreme Flowable (BFF), and SureFil<sup>®</sup> SDR<sup>®</sup> flow (SDR). Class II box preparation (4 × 4 × 3 mm) in extracted intact human molars was carried out and restored using the experimental groups, all according to the manufacturers' recommendations except FS4. Samples were aged by thermocycling (2,000 cycles). Microleakage was calculated by measuring dye penetration in sectioned teeth using a stereomicroscope. Level of significance was set at <i>P</i> < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>BFF and FS2 exhibited the least dye penetration and microleakage measurement with no significant difference between the two groups, followed by SDR. FS4 showed the highest microleakage with significant difference in comparison with BFF and FS2. Gingival microleakage was found to be significantly higher than occlusal microleakage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The microleakage of the bulk-fill composites BFF and SDR are comparable with conventional composite FS2; however, it is more predictable to use FS2.</p>","PeriodicalId":45181,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Medicine and Applied Science","volume":"10 2","pages":"102-109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1556/1646.10.2018.07","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Medicine and Applied Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/1646.10.2018.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Aim: The objective was to compare the marginal leakage (silver nitrate uptake) of nanohybrid resin-based composite (RBC) and two bulk-fill flowable RBCs with specific clinical protocols.

Methods: Four experimental groups of RBC were investigated including conventional composite Filtek™ Supreme in 2 mm increment (FS2), Filtek™ Supreme in 4 mm increment (FS4), Filtek™ Supreme Flowable (BFF), and SureFil® SDR® flow (SDR). Class II box preparation (4 × 4 × 3 mm) in extracted intact human molars was carried out and restored using the experimental groups, all according to the manufacturers' recommendations except FS4. Samples were aged by thermocycling (2,000 cycles). Microleakage was calculated by measuring dye penetration in sectioned teeth using a stereomicroscope. Level of significance was set at P < 0.05.

Results: BFF and FS2 exhibited the least dye penetration and microleakage measurement with no significant difference between the two groups, followed by SDR. FS4 showed the highest microleakage with significant difference in comparison with BFF and FS2. Gingival microleakage was found to be significantly higher than occlusal microleakage.

Conclusion: The microleakage of the bulk-fill composites BFF and SDR are comparable with conventional composite FS2; however, it is more predictable to use FS2.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

体积填充可流动与纳米填充树脂基复合材料的微泄漏比较。
目的:目的是比较纳米混合树脂基复合材料(RBC)和两种具有特定临床方案的体积填充可流动红细胞的边缘渗漏(硝酸银摄取)。方法:采用常规复合Filtek™Supreme 2 mm增液(FS2)、Filtek™Supreme 4 mm增液(FS4)、Filtek™Supreme Flowable (BFF)和SureFil®SDR®flow (SDR)四组RBC。除FS4外,其余各实验组均按生产厂家推荐的方法进行修复,提取完整人磨牙进行II类盒状制备(4 × 4 × 3 mm)。样品通过热循环(2000次)老化。用体视显微镜测量染料在牙齿切片中的渗透,计算微渗漏。结果:BFF和FS2的染料渗透和微漏测量最小,两组间无显著差异,SDR次之。与BFF和FS2相比,FS4的微渗漏最高,差异显著。牙龈微漏明显高于咬合微漏。结论:块体填充复合材料BFF和SDR的微渗漏性能与常规复合材料FS2相当;然而,使用FS2更容易预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Interventional Medicine and Applied Science
Interventional Medicine and Applied Science MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信