Abstract

Abstract Introduction Despite advances and innovations in restorative dentistry, microleakage remains one of the main problems in this area. Objective To evaluate in vitro marginal microleakage of Bulk Fill resins in class II cavities, with cervical termination in the dentin. Material and method Cavities, standardized on the mesial and distal surfaces, were prepared in forty top molars and randomly assigned to four groups (n = 10), according to the resin used. G1 (control): Filtek Z350 (3M/ESPE); G2: Filtek Bulk Fill flow (3M/ESPE); G3: Surefill SDR (Dentsply); G4: X-tra (Voco). These were further subdivided into subgroups according to the strategy used to apply the adhesive (self-etch technique and conventional). After storage for 24 hours in an oven (37 °C), the samples were submitted to the thermocycling test (500 cycles: 5 °C/55 °C). They were later waterproofed, immersed in Basic Fuchsin (0.5%) and sectioned in the mesial-distal direction for evaluation using a stereo magnifying glass at 40X (Coleman) Scores from 0 to 3 were assigned according to the microinfiltration observed. The Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests, with a significance level of 5%, were used for statistical analysis. Result There was no statistically significant difference between the Bulk Fill resins when the total acid-etching technique was used. Only the Filtek Bulk fill flow resin presented statistically significant results when the application of the adhesive system strategy was considered, with worse results, in relation to other groups, when it the self-etching strategy was considered. Conclusion The degree of leakage of the bulk fill resins studied, in class II cavities, was not influenced by the method of application of the adhesive system (conventional or two-step self-etching bonding agent), except for the Filtek Bulk fill flow.

Highlights

  • Despite advances and innovations in restorative dentistry, microleakage remains one of the main problems in this area

  • Part Primer: Methacrylates phosphate, Vitrebond copolymer, Bis-GMA, HEMA, water, ethanol, silica particles treated with silane, initiators and stabilizers Adhesive part: hydrophobic dimethacrylate, methacrylate phosphate, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA) Silica particles treated with silane, Initiators and Stabilizers

  • The present study evaluated the marginal sealing capacity of bulk fill composite resins in Class II cavities, ending in the dentin

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Despite advances and innovations in restorative dentistry, microleakage remains one of the main problems in this area. G1 (control): Filtek Z350 (3M/ESPE); G2: Filtek Bulk Fill flow (3M/ESPE); G3: Surefill SDR (Dentsply); G4: X-tra (Voco) These were further subdivided into subgroups according to the strategy used to apply the adhesive (self‐etch technique and conventional). After storage for 24 hours in an oven (37 °C), the samples were submitted to the thermocycling test (500 cycles: 5 °C/55 °C) They were later waterproofed, immersed in Basic Fuchsin (0.5%) and sectioned in the mesial-distal direction for evaluation using a stereo magnifying glass at 40X (Coleman) Scores from 0 to 3 were assigned according to the microinfiltration observed. Alternatives are being studied to try to minimize or eliminate the indices of microleakage in restorations of composite resins In this context, there are bulk fill compound resins whose insertion technique involves a single increment, up to 6mm thick, in subsequent direct restorations[4,5]. These modulators interact with camphorquinone, reducing the contraction module and increasing the number of linear constraints, generating less contraction stress and degree of polymerization preserved, the extension of the pre-gel stage[8]

Objectives
Methods
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call