Original Article

Marginal Sealing of Bulk Fill versus Conventional Composites in Class II Composite Restorations: An In Vitro Study

Abstract

Objectives: Bulk fill composites are preferred to conventional composites with time-consuming incremental application technique, given that they have good mechanical properties and low microleakage. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the dentinal marginal microleakage of bulk fill (in two viscosities) and conventional composites in class II cavities in maxillary premolars.
Materials and Methods: In this in vitro studyˏ 42 class II cavities were prepared in the mesial and distal surfaces of 21 maxillary premolars extending 1 mm below the cementoenamel junction, and restored with Grandio composite with 2-mm increments, and X-tra fil and X-tra base with 4-mm increments. After 24 h of storage at 37oC and 100% humidity, they were thermocycled (500 cyclesˏ 5-55oC), stored in basic fuchsine, sectioned, and evaluated under a stereomicroscope (×40). The microleakage scores of the gingival margin were recorded. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS 21 via the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests at P≤0.05 level of significance.
Results: No statistically significant differences were noted among the groups in marginal microleakage (P=0.47). No statistically significant difference was noted between bulk and incremental application techniques in this respect either (P=0.23).
Conclusion: There was no difference in marginal microleakage between the bulk fill and conventional composites.

1. Scotti N, Comba A, Gambino A, Paolino DS, Alovisi M, Pasqualini D, et al. Microleakage at enamel and dentin margins with a bulk fills flowable resin. Eur J Dent 2014 Jan;8(1):1-8.
2. 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 May;42(5):575-81.
3. Relhan N, Ponnappa KC, Relhan A, Jain A, Gupta P. An in-vitro comparison of microleakage between two posterior composites restored with different layering techniques using two different LED modes. J Clin Diagn Res 2015 May;9(5):78-81.
4. Furness A, Tadros MY, Looney SW, Rueggeberg FA. Effect of bulk/incremental fill on internal gap formation of bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2014 Apr;42:439-49.
5. Stavridakis MM, Kakaboura AI, Ardu S, Krejci I. Marginal and internal adaptation of bulk-filled Class I and Cuspal coverage direct resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2007 Sep;32(5):515-23.
6. Ratih DN, Palamara JE, Messer HH. Minimizing dentinal fluid flow associated with gap formation. J Dent Res 2006 Nov;85(11):1027-31.
7. Barceleiro MO, Soares GM, Espindola O, Kahn S, Pola IP, Sampaio HF. Low-shrinkage composites: an in vitro evaluation of sealing ability after occlusal loading. Gen Dent 2015;63(3):36-40.
8. Miletic V, Peric D, Milosevic M, Manojlovic D, Mitrovic N. Local deformation fields and marginal integrity of sculptable bulk-fill, low-shrinkage and conventional composites. Dent Mater 2016 Nov;32(11):1441-51.
9. 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 Jun;40(6):500-5.
10. Gamarra VSS, Borges GA, Júnior LHB, Spohr AM. Marginal adaptation and microleakage of a bulk-fill composite resin photopolymerized with different techniques. Odontology 2018 Jan;106:56-63.
11. Karatas O, Bayindir YZ. A comparison of dentin bond strength and degree of polymerization of bulk-fill and methacrylate-based flowable composites. J Conserv Dent 2018 May;21(3)285-289.
12. Behery H, El-Mowafy O, El-Badrawy W, Nabih S. Gingival microleakage of class II bulk-fill composite resin restorations. Dent Med Prob 2018;55(4):383-8.
13. Civelek A, Ersoy M, L'Hotelier E, Soyman M, Say EC. Polymerization shrinkage and microleakage in Class II cavities of various resin composites. Oper Dent 2003 Sep;28(5):635-41.
14. Veloso SRM, Lemos CAA, Moraes SLD, Vascencelos BCE, Pellizzer EP, Monteiro GQM. Clinical performance of bulk-fill and conventional resin composite restorations in posterior teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Invest 2019 Jan;23(1):221-33.
15. Vania S, Sanchez G, Gilberto AB, Luiz HB, Ana MS. Marginal adaptation and
microleakage of a bulk-fill composite resin photopolymerized with different techniques. Odontology 2018 Jan;106(1):56-61.
16. Van Dijken JW, Pallesen U. A randomized controlled three year evaluation of "bulk-filled" posterior resin restorations based on stress decreasing resin technology. Dent Mater 2014 Sep;30(9):245-51.
17. Leprince JG, Palin WM, Vanacker J, Sabbagh J, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physico-mechanical characteristics of commercially available bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2014 Aug;42(8):993-1000.
18. Kim RJ, Kim YJ, Choi NS, Lee IB. Polymerization shrinkage, modulus, and shrinkage stress related to tooth-restoration interfacial debonding in bulk-fill composites. J Dent 2015 Apr;43:430-9.
19. Benetti AR, Havndrup-Pedersen C, Honoré D, Pedersen MK, Pallesen U. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization contractionˏ depth of cureˏ and gap formation. Oper Dent 2015 Mar;40(2):190-200.
20. Al-Harbi F, Kaisarly D, Michna A, ArRejaie A, Bader D, El Gezawi M. Cervical interfacial bonding effectiveness of class II bulk versus incremental fill resin composite restorations. Oper Dent 2015 Nov;40(6):622-35.
21. Van Ende A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, Poitevin A, Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B. Bulk-filling of high C-factor posterior cavities: effect on adhesion to cavity-bottom dentin. Dent Mater 2013 Mar;29:269-77.
22. Agarwal RS, Hiremath H, Agarwal J, Garg A. Evaluation of cervical marginal and internal adaptation using newer bulk fill composites: An in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2015 Jan;18(1):56-61.
23. Manhart J, Chen HY, Mehl A, Weber K, Hickel R. Marginal quality and microleakage of adhesive class V restorations. J Dent 2001 Feb;29:123-30.
24. Wahab F, Shaini FJ, Morgano SM. The effect of thermocycling on microleakage of several commercially available composite Class V restorations in vitro. J Prosthet Dent 2003 Aug;90:168-74.
Files
IssueVol 17 (Continuously Published Article-Based) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article
DOI https://doi.org/10.18502/fid.v17i40.5313
Keywords
Composite Resins Dental Leakage Dental Restoration Permanent
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Shadman N, Pezeshki B, Rostami S. Marginal Sealing of Bulk Fill versus Conventional Composites in Class II Composite Restorations: An In Vitro Study. Front Dent. 2021;17.