COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MICROLEAKAGE AND SHEAR BOND STRENGTH BETWEEN BULK FILL AND SELF ADHESIVE FLOWABLE COMPOSITE RESINS

Abdelrahman, Mohamed H.; Mahmoud, Elsayed M.; Ghoneim, Mona M.; Kammar, Adel A.

doi:10.21608/adjalexu.2016.58047

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MICROLEAKAGE AND SHEAR BOND STRENGTH BETWEEN BULK FILL AND SELF ADHESIVE FLOWABLE COMPOSITE RESINS

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Instructor at Conservative Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

² Professor of Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt

³ Assistant Professor of Operative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.

⁴ Professor of Dental Material, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University. Alexandria, Egypt

10.21608/adjalexu.2016.58047

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Advances in flowable composites including self-adhesive and bulk fill flowable composite resin have been introduced for time saving and better adaptation. OBJECTIVES: was to compare the microleakage and shear bond strength of Self-adhesive& Bulk fill flowable composite resins. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of forty non carious extracted human molars were selected for this study. For microleakage test, twenty Class V cavities were prepared on labial surface. Teeth were divided into 2 groups (n=10), Group I: was treated with self-adhesive flowable composite, Group II: was treated with one step self-etch adhesive system with bulk fill flowable composite. Microleakage scores were evaluated on the occlusal and cervical walls and data was analyzed statistically. For Shear bond strength test, twenty molars were embedded in acrylic resin inside plastic molds; the occlusal portion of each tooth was removed. To standardize the bonding area, cylindrical shaped plastic matrices with 4mm internal diameter and 3mm height were used. Specimens were divided into 2 groups (n=10), Group I: was treated with selfadhesive flowable composite, Group II: was treated with one step self-etch adhesive system with bulk fill flowable composite. Shear bond strength was measured using universal testing machine. RESULTS:The cervical margins showed a non-significant higher mean of microleakage scores than the occlusal margins in the two studied restorative materials. Filtek flowable bulk fill composite showed significantly higher mean of microleakage scores than Vertise flow at both the cervical and occlusal margins. Filtek flowable bulk fill composite showed a significantly higher mean of shear bond strength than Vertise flow. CONCLUSIONS: All of the restorative materials used were unable to prevent microleakage. Filtek flowable bulk fill composite showed more microleakage but higher shear bond strength than Vertise flow

Keywords

References

1. Tarle Z, Attin T, Marovic D. Influence of irradiation time on subsurface degree of conversion and microhardness of high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites. Clin Oral Investig 2015; 19: 831-40.
2. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Determinants of in vitro gap formation of resin composites. J Dent 2004; 32: 109-15.
3. Masao I, Hatanaka K, Suzuki K. Class V and flowable resin. Dent Mater 2006; 22: 875-83.
4. Deb S, Sehmi H. A comparative study of the properties of dental resin composites polymerized with plasma and halogen light. Dent Mater 2003; 19: 517-22.
5. Salerno M, Derchi G, Thorat S. Surface morfology and mechanical properties of new generation flowable resin composites for dental restorations. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 1221-8.
6. Wei Y, Silikas N, Zhang Z. Hygroscopic dimensional changes of self-adhering and new resin-matrix composites during watter sorption/desorption cycles. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 259-66.
7. Nagpal R, Manuja N, Tyagi S. In vitro bonding effectiveness of self-etch adhesives with different application techniques: a microleakage and scanning electron microscopic study. J Conserv Dent 2011; 14: 258-63.
8. Cenci M, Demarco F, Carvalho R. Class II composite resin restorationswith two polymerization techniques: relationship between microtensile bond strength and marginal leakage. J Dent 2005; 33: 603-10.
9. DebS,DiSilvioL,MacklerEH,MillarJB.Prewarming of dental composites. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 851-9.
10.Moorthy A, Hogg CH, Dowling AH, Grufferty BF, Benetti AR, Fleming GJ. Cuspal deflection and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with bulk fill flowable resin based composite base materials. J Dent 2012; 40: 500-5.
11. Reena RK, Gill S, Miglani A. Storage media: A Neglected Variable for in Vitro Studies. J Ind Ortho Soc 2011; 45: 5-8.
12.Kucukesmen C, Sonmez H. Microleakage of class V composite restorations with different bonding systems on florosed teeth. Eur J Dent 2008; 2: 48-58.
13.Cao L, Geerts S, Gueders A, Albert A, Seidel L, Charpentier J. Experimental comparison of cavity sealing ability of five dental adhesive systems after thermocycling. J Adhes Dent 2003; 5: 139-44.
14. Benedetti M, Webber F, Costa GM. Bulkfillresine based composite:Microleakage of class II restorations. J Surg Clin Dent 2014; 2: 15-9.
15. Eunice C, Margarida A, João CL, Filomena B. 99mTc in the evaluation of microleakage of composite resin restorations with SonicFill^TM. An in vitro experimental model. Open J Stomatology 2012; 2: 340-7.

16. Juloski J, Goracii C, Rengo C, Giovannetti A, Vichi A, Vulicevic ZR, et al. Enamel and dentine bond strength of new simplified two adhesive materials with and without preliminary phosphoric acid-etching. Am J Dent 2012; 25: 239-43.
17. Sharmer V, Rampal P, Kumar S. Shear bond strength of composite resin to dentine after application of cavity disinfectants. Contemp Clin Dent 2011; 2: 155-9.
18.Soldo M, Simeon P, Matijevic J, Glavina D, Illes D, Kramek SJ. Marginal leakage of class V cavities restored with silorane-based and methacrylate-based resin systems. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 853-8.

19. Abbas G, Fleming G, Harrington E, Shortall A. Cuspal
movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. J Dent 2003; 31: 437-44.
20. Ferracane JL. Buonocore lecture. Placing dental composites—a stressful experience. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 247-57.
21.Janković O, Arbutina A, Knežević N, Arbutina R. Microleakage of Class V Cavities Restored with Flowable Composite Materials. Serbian Dent J 2014; 61: 314-7.
22. Campos EA, Ardu S, Lefever D, Jassé FF, Bortolotto T, Krejci I. Marginal adaptation of class II cavities restored with bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2014; 2: 2-7.
23.Aboelnaga A, Yousef M, Ramadan R, Bahgat SF, Alshawwa L. Does the use of a novel self-adhesive flowable composite reduce nanoleakage? Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2015; 7: 55-64.
24.Vichi A, Margvelashvili M, Goracci C, Papacchini F, Ferrari M. Bonding and sealing ability of a new self- adhering flowable composite resin in class I restorations. Clin oral Investing 2013; 17: 1497-506.
25. Fu J, Kakuda S, Pan F, Hoshika S, Ting S, Fukuoka A, et al. Bonding performance of a newly developed step-less all-in-one system on dentin. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 203- 11.
26.Tuloglu N, Tunc ES, Ozer S, Bayrak S. Shear bond strength of self-adhering flowable composite on dentin with and without application of an adhesive system. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater 2014; 12: 97-101.
27. Brackett WW, Tay FR, Looney SW, Ito S, Haisch LD, Pashley DH. Microtensile dentin and enamel bond strengths of recent self-etching resins. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 89-95.
28. Wang T, Nikaido T, Nakabayashi N. Photocure bonding agent containing phosphoric methacrylate. Dent Mater 1991; 7: 59-62.
29.Watanabe I, Nakabayashi N, Pashley DH. Bonding to ground dentin by a pheny l-P self-etching primer. J Dent Res 1994; 73: 1212–20.
30.Yoshida Y, Nagakane K, Fukuda R, Nakayama Y, Okazaki M, Shintani H, et al. Comparative study on adhesive performance of functional monomers. J Dent Res 2004; 83: 454-58.
31. Ilie N, Schöner C, Bücher K. An in-vitro assessment of the shear bond strength of bulk-fill resin composites to permanent and deciduous teeth. J Dent 2014; 42: 850-5.