Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites in comparison to the incremental placement technique
- PMID: 29386787
- PMCID: PMC5767834
- DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_198_17
Fracture resistance of posterior teeth restored with high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites in comparison to the incremental placement technique
Abstract
Aim: Comparative evaluation of the fracture resistance of maxillary premolar teeth restored with two high-viscosity bulk-fill composites and incrementally placed composite.
Materials and methods: Seventy-five freshly extracted maxillary premolar teeth were selected. Fifteen specimens served as positive control (Group 1). Mesio-occluso-distal cavity preparation was prepared on the rest of the specimens. These specimens were further divided into four groups: unrestored teeth (Group 2), teeth restored with incrementally placed nanocomposite (Group 3), teeth restored with high-viscosity bulk-fill giomer (Group 4), and teeth restored with high-viscosity bulk-fill nanocomposite (Group 5). The specimens were then subjected to compressive axial load using Instron universal testing machine. Data were analyzed using data were analyzed using Statistical package for social sciences software (SPSS v 20.0, IBM Corp.).
Results: The positive control group exhibited highest fracture resistance (1104.70 ± 122.2 N). There was no statistically significant difference seen in between the incrementally placed nanocomposite and high-viscosity nanocomposite (P > 0.05). The fracture resistance values displayed by the high-viscosity bulk-fill giomer were found to be statistically lower than the other two groups.
Conclusion: High-viscosity bulk-fill nanocomposite may substitute incrementally placed nanocomposite with respect to fracture resistance.
Keywords: Bulk fill; fracture resistance; giomer; nanocomposite.
Conflict of interest statement
There are no conflicts of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Assessing Fracture Resistance of Restored Premolars with Novel Composite Materials: An In Vitro Study.Int J Dent. 2021 Aug 20;2021:5512708. doi: 10.1155/2021/5512708. eCollection 2021. Int J Dent. 2021. PMID: 34462637 Free PMC article.
-
Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored With Bulk Fill, Bulk Fill Flowable, Fiber-reinforced, and Conventional Resin Composite.Oper Dent. 2016 Sep-Oct;41(5):E131-E140. doi: 10.2341/15-320-L. Epub 2016 Jun 28. Oper Dent. 2016. PMID: 27352045
-
Can Fiber Application Affect the Fracture Strength of Endodontically Treated Teeth Restored with a Low Viscosity Bulk-Fill Composite?Biomed Res Int. 2019 Jan 22;2019:3126931. doi: 10.1155/2019/3126931. eCollection 2019. Biomed Res Int. 2019. PMID: 30805363 Free PMC article.
-
Mechanical properties, shrinkage stress, cuspal strain and fracture resistance of molars restored with bulk-fill composites and incremental filling technique.J Dent. 2015 Dec;43(12):1519-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.09.007. Epub 2015 Oct 9. J Dent. 2015. PMID: 26449641
-
Effect of bulk-fill base material on fracture strength of root-filled teeth restored with laminate resin composite restorations.J Dent. 2017 Aug;63:60-64. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.05.016. Epub 2017 May 29. J Dent. 2017. PMID: 28571830
Cited by
-
The Impact of Different Fiber Placement Techniques on the Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored with Direct Resin Composite, In Vitro Study.J Funct Biomater. 2025 Jun 17;16(6):225. doi: 10.3390/jfb16060225. J Funct Biomater. 2025. PMID: 40558911 Free PMC article.
-
Optimizing fracture resistance of endodontically treated maxillary premolars restored with preheated thermos-viscous composite post-thermocycling, a comparative study. Part I.BMC Oral Health. 2024 Mar 2;24(1):295. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-03959-7. BMC Oral Health. 2024. PMID: 38431585 Free PMC article.
-
Assessing Fracture Resistance of Restored Premolars with Novel Composite Materials: An In Vitro Study.Int J Dent. 2021 Aug 20;2021:5512708. doi: 10.1155/2021/5512708. eCollection 2021. Int J Dent. 2021. PMID: 34462637 Free PMC article.
-
Fracture resistance and mode of failure of modified Polyether-ether-ketone versus lithium disilicate endocrowns.BMC Oral Health. 2025 Jan 8;25(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-05232-3. BMC Oral Health. 2025. PMID: 39773219 Free PMC article.
-
Fracture resistance of molars with class II MOD cavities restored with bulk-fill, no-cap flowable bulk-fill, and conventional resin composite restorative systems after 6-months water storage.BMC Oral Health. 2025 May 20;25(1):741. doi: 10.1186/s12903-025-05951-1. BMC Oral Health. 2025. PMID: 40394542 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
References
-
- Loguercio AD, Reis A, Schroeder M, Balducci I, Versluis A, Ballester RY, et al. Polymerization shrinkage: Effects of boundary conditions and filling technique of resin composite restorations. J Dent. 2004;32:459–70. - PubMed
-
- Bhardwaj TP, Solmon P, Parameswaran A. Tooth restored with composite resin – A comparative analysis. Trends Biomater Artif Organs. 2002;15:57–60.
-
- He Z, Shimada Y, Tagami J. The effects of cavity size and incremental technique on micro-tensile bond strength of resin composite in class I cavities. Dent Mater. 2007;23:533–8. - PubMed
-
- Braga RR, Ferracane JL. Alternatives in polymerization contraction stress management. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2004;15:176–84. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources