A method to investigate the shrinkage stress developed by resin-composites bonded to a single flat surface

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. e27-e34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas V.S. Pabis ◽  
Tathy A. Xavier ◽  
Ecinele F. Rosa ◽  
Flávia P. Rodrigues ◽  
Josete B.C. Meira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Flat Surface ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Resin Composites

Polymerization shrinkage-stress kinetics of resin-composites

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. e57
Author(s):  
H. Al-Sunbul ◽  
N. Silikas ◽  
D.C. Watts
Keyword(s):  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Polymerization Shrinkage ◽  
Kinetics Of

Polymerization Shrinkage Stress Kinetics and Related Properties of Bulk-fill Resin Composites

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 374-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
HM El-Damanhoury ◽  
JA Platt
Keyword(s):  
Standard Procedure ◽  
Stress Rate ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Polymerization Shrinkage ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Microhardness Data ◽  
Knoop Microhardness ◽  
Kinetics Of ◽  
Fill Materials

SUMMARY The present study assessed the polymerization shrinkage stress kinetics of five low-shrinkage light-cured bulk-fill resin composites: Surefil SDR flow (SF, Dentsply), Tetric EvoCeram Bulkfil (TE, Ivoclar Vivadent), Venus Bulk Fill (VB, Heraeus Kulzer), x-tra fil (XF, Voco), and experimental bulk fill (FB, 3M ESPE). Filtek Z250 (FZ, 3M ESPE) was used as a control. Real-time shrinkage stress of investigated composites was measured using a tensometer; maximum shrinkage stress, stress rate (Rmax), and time to reach maximum stress rate (tmax) were recorded. Flexural strength and modulus were measured using a standard procedure, and curing efficiency of 4-mm long specimens was determined using bottom/top percentage Knoop microhardness. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni multiple range tests at a significance level of α=0.05. Results of shrinkage stress, Rmax, and tmax of all bulk-fill materials were significantly lower (p<0.05) than those of the control except for XF. All tested bulk-fill materials were able to achieve acceptable curing efficiency (≥80% bottom/top percentage) at 4-mm depth. In conclusion, this study reports a significant reduction in polymerization shrinkage stress while maintaining comparable curing efficiency at 4 mm for some bulk-fill composites and supports their potential use in posterior clinical situations.

Bonding Interaction and Shrinkage Stress of Low-viscosity Bulk Fill Resin Composites With High-viscosity Bulk Fill or Conventional Resin Composites

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (6) ◽  
pp. 625-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
ER Cerda-Rizo ◽  
M de Paula Rodrigues ◽  
ABF Vilela ◽  
SSL Braga ◽  
LRS Oliveira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Failure Mode ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
High Viscosity ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Low Viscosity ◽  
Bonding Interaction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Square Analysis

SUMMARY Objective: To analyze the shrinkage stress, bonding interaction, and failure modes between different low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional resin composites produced by the same manufacturer or a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite used to restore the occlusal layer in posterior teeth. Methods & Materials: Three low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites were associated with the conventional resin composites made by the same manufacturers or with a high-viscosity bulk fill resin composite, resulting in six groups (n=10). The bonding interaction between resin composites was tested by assessing the microshear bond strength (μSBS). The samples were thermocycled and were tested with 1-mm/min crosshead speed, and the failure mode was evaluated. The post-gel shrinkage (Shr) of all the resin composites was measured using a strain gauge (n=10). The modulus of elasticity (E) and the hardness (KHN) were measured using the Knoop hardness test. Two-dimensional finite element models were created for analyzing the stress caused by shrinkage and contact loading. The μSBS, Shr, E, and KHN data were analyzed using the Student t-test and one-way analysis of variance. The failure mode data were subjected to chi-square analysis (α=0.05). The stress distribution was analyzed qualitatively. Results: No significant difference was verified for μSBS between low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and conventional or high-viscosity bulk fill composites in terms of restoring the occlusal layer (p=0.349). Cohesive failure of the low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites was the most frequent failure mode. The Shr, E, and KHN varied between low-viscosity and high-viscosity resin composites. The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites on the occlusal layer reduced the stress at the enamel interface on the occlusal surface. Conclusions: The use of high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites as an occlusal layer for low-viscosity bulk fill resin composites to restore the posterior teeth can be a viable alternative, as it shows a similar bonding interaction to conventional resin composites as well as lower shrinkage stress at the enamel margin.

Monomer conversion, microhardness, internal marginal adaptation, and shrinkage stress of bulk-fill resin composites

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 1542-1551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruna Marin Fronza ◽  
Frederick Allen Rueggeberg ◽  
Roberto Ruggiero Braga ◽  
Borys Mogilevych ◽  
Luis Eduardo Silva Soares ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monomer Conversion ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Marginal Adaptation ◽  
Resin Composites

Polymerization Shrinkage and Depth of Cure of Bulk-Fill Resin Composites and Highly Filled Flowable Resin

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
J-H Jang ◽  
S-H Park ◽  
I-N Hwang
Keyword(s):  
Surface Hardness ◽  
Bottom Surface ◽  
Shrinkage Stress ◽  
Internal Diameter ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Polymerization Shrinkage ◽  
Depth Of Cure ◽  
Custom Made ◽  
Polymerization Behavior ◽  
The Mean

SUMMARY The aim of this study was to evaluate the polymerization behavior and depth of cure (DOC) of recently introduced resin composites for posterior use: highly filled flowable composite and composites for bulk fill. A highly filled flowable (G-aenial Universal Flo [GUF]), two bulk-fill flowables (Surefil SDR Flow [SDR] and Venus Bulk fill [VBF]), and a bulk-fill nonflowable composite (Tetric N-Ceram Bulk fill [TBF]) were compared with two conventional composites (Tetric Flow [TF], Filtek Supreme Ultra [FS]). Linear polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress were each measured with custom-made devices. To evaluate DOC, the composite specimen was prepared using a mold with a hole of 4 mm depth and 4 mm internal diameter. The hole was bulk filled with each of the six composites and light cured for 20 seconds, followed by 24 hours of water storage. The surface hardness was measured on the top and the bottom using a Vickers microhardness (HV) indenter. The linear polymerization shrinkage of the composite specimens after photo-initiation decreased in the following order: TF and GUF > VBF > SDR > FS and TBF (p<0.05). The polymerization shrinkage stress of the six composite groups decreased in the following order: GUF > TF and VBF > SDR > FS and TBF (p<0.05). The mean bottom surface HV of SDR and VBF exceeded 80% of the top surface HV (HV-80%). However, the bottom of GUF and TBF failed to reach HV-80%. A highly filled flowable (GUF) revealed limitations in polymerization shrinkage and DOC. Bulk-fill flowables (SDR and VBF) were properly cured in 4-mm bulk, but they shrank more than the conventional nonflowable composite. A bulk-fill nonflowable (TBF) showed comparable shrinkage to the conventional nonflowable composite, but it was not sufficiently cured in the 4-mm bulk.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document