Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols
Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the compressive strength, flexural strength and flexural modulus of high-viscosity, low-viscosity bulk-fill, and conventional nano-hybrid resin composite materials alone and when covered with nano-hybrid resin composite at different incremental...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Universidade Estadual Paulista
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | Brazilian Dental Science |
| Online Access: | https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/1719 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849228566958440448 |
|---|---|
| author | Aylin Cilingir Alev Ozsoy Meltem Mert Eren Ozge Behram Benin Dikmen Mutlu Ozcan |
| author_facet | Aylin Cilingir Alev Ozsoy Meltem Mert Eren Ozge Behram Benin Dikmen Mutlu Ozcan |
| author_sort | Aylin Cilingir |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description |
Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the compressive strength, flexural strength and flexural modulus of high-viscosity, low-viscosity bulk-fill, and conventional nano-hybrid resin composite materials alone and when covered with nano-hybrid resin composite at different incremental thicknesses on the bulk-fill composites. Materials and Methods: Specimens (N=60) were fabricated from the following materials or their combinations (n=10 per group): a) conventional nano-hybrid composite Z550 (FK), b) high-viscosity bulk-fill composite (Tetric N Ceram-TBF), c) low-viscosity bulk-fill composite SDR (SDR), d) Sonicfill (SF), e) SDR (2 mm)+FK (2 mm), f) SDR (4 mm)+FK (4 mm). After 24 h water storage, compressive strength was measured in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Additional specimens (N=40) (25x2x2 mm3) were made from FK, TBF, SDR and SF in order to determine the flexural strength and the flexural modulus, (n=10) and subjected to three-point bending test (0.5 mm/min). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tamhane’s T2 post-hoc tests (p<0.05). Results: The mean compressive strength (MPa) of the nano-hybrid composite (FK) was significantly higher (223.8±41.3) than those of the other groups (123±27 - 170±24) (p<0.001). SDR (4 mm)+FK (2 mm) showed significantly higher compressive strength than when covered with 4 mm (143±30) or when used alone (146±11) (p<0.05). The mean flexural strength (159±31) and the flexural modulus of FK (34±7) was significantly higher than that of the high- or low-viscosity bulk-fill composites (p<0.001). The mean flexural strength of SF (132±20) was significantly higher compared to TBF (95±25) (p<0.05). Conclusion: Bulk-fill resin composites demonstrated poorer mechanical properties compared to nano-hybrid composite but similar to that of SF. Increasing the thickness of low-viscosity bulk-fill composite (SDR) from 2 to 4 mm underneath the nano-hybrid composite (FK) can improve the mechanical properties of the bulk-fill composites.
Keywords
Bulk-fill composites; Compressive strength; Flexural modulus; Flexural strength; Mechanical properties.
|
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-31902fcae9854a0c8286db30b6f7d3e7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2178-6011 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | Universidade Estadual Paulista |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Brazilian Dental Science |
| spelling | doaj-art-31902fcae9854a0c8286db30b6f7d3e72025-08-22T19:01:35ZengUniversidade Estadual PaulistaBrazilian Dental Science2178-60112019-04-0122210.14295/bds.2019.v22i2.1719Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocolsAylin Cilingir0Alev Ozsoy1Meltem Mert Eren2Ozge Behram3Benin Dikmen4Mutlu Ozcan5Trakya University – Faculty of Dentistry – Department of Restorative Dentistry – Edirne – Turkey.Istanbul Medipol University – School of Dentistry – Department of Restorative Dentistry – Istanbul – Turkey.Kemerburgaz University – School of Dentistry – Department of Restorative Dentistry – Istanbul – Turkey.Istanbul Medipol University – School of Dentistry – Department of Restorative Dentistry – Istanbul – Turkey.Istanbul Medipol University – School of Dentistry – Department of Restorative Dentistry – Istanbul – Turkey.University of Zurich – Dental Materials Unit – Center for Dental and Oral Medicine – Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics and Dental Materials Science – Zurich – Switzerland. Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the compressive strength, flexural strength and flexural modulus of high-viscosity, low-viscosity bulk-fill, and conventional nano-hybrid resin composite materials alone and when covered with nano-hybrid resin composite at different incremental thicknesses on the bulk-fill composites. Materials and Methods: Specimens (N=60) were fabricated from the following materials or their combinations (n=10 per group): a) conventional nano-hybrid composite Z550 (FK), b) high-viscosity bulk-fill composite (Tetric N Ceram-TBF), c) low-viscosity bulk-fill composite SDR (SDR), d) Sonicfill (SF), e) SDR (2 mm)+FK (2 mm), f) SDR (4 mm)+FK (4 mm). After 24 h water storage, compressive strength was measured in a universal testing machine (1 mm/min). Additional specimens (N=40) (25x2x2 mm3) were made from FK, TBF, SDR and SF in order to determine the flexural strength and the flexural modulus, (n=10) and subjected to three-point bending test (0.5 mm/min). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tamhane’s T2 post-hoc tests (p<0.05). Results: The mean compressive strength (MPa) of the nano-hybrid composite (FK) was significantly higher (223.8±41.3) than those of the other groups (123±27 - 170±24) (p<0.001). SDR (4 mm)+FK (2 mm) showed significantly higher compressive strength than when covered with 4 mm (143±30) or when used alone (146±11) (p<0.05). The mean flexural strength (159±31) and the flexural modulus of FK (34±7) was significantly higher than that of the high- or low-viscosity bulk-fill composites (p<0.001). The mean flexural strength of SF (132±20) was significantly higher compared to TBF (95±25) (p<0.05). Conclusion: Bulk-fill resin composites demonstrated poorer mechanical properties compared to nano-hybrid composite but similar to that of SF. Increasing the thickness of low-viscosity bulk-fill composite (SDR) from 2 to 4 mm underneath the nano-hybrid composite (FK) can improve the mechanical properties of the bulk-fill composites. Keywords Bulk-fill composites; Compressive strength; Flexural modulus; Flexural strength; Mechanical properties. https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/1719 |
| spellingShingle | Aylin Cilingir Alev Ozsoy Meltem Mert Eren Ozge Behram Benin Dikmen Mutlu Ozcan Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols Brazilian Dental Science |
| title | Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| title_full | Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| title_fullStr | Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| title_short | Mechanical properties of bulk-fill versus nanohybrid composites: effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| title_sort | mechanical properties of bulk fill versus nanohybrid composites effect of layer thickness and application protocols |
| url | https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/1719 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aylincilingir mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols AT alevozsoy mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols AT meltemmerteren mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols AT ozgebehram mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols AT benindikmen mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols AT mutluozcan mechanicalpropertiesofbulkfillversusnanohybridcompositeseffectoflayerthicknessandapplicationprotocols |