Effect of composite polymerization stress and placement technique on dentin micropermeability of Class I restorations

Bruna Marin Fronza, Gabriel Flores Abuna, Roberto Ruggiero Braga, Frederick Rueggeberg, Marcelo Giannini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the effect of polymerization stress and insertion technique on dentin micropermeability of composites placed under pulpal pressure. Materials and Methods: One high-viscosity conventional (HC; Filtek Supreme Ultra; 3M Oral), one low-viscosity conventional (LC; Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable; 3M Oral), one high-viscosity bulk fill (HBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Restorative; 3M Oral), and one low-viscosity bulk fill (LBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable; 3M Oral) composite were evaluated. Polymerization stress was measured with materials bonded to acrylic rods in a universal testing machine (n = 5). Class I preparations were made in extracted molars, in which tooth roots were removed and the pulpal chambers cleaned. Preparations were coupled to a hydraulic device to simulate pulpal pressure during composite placement (n = 5). Conventional composites were placed in two horizontal increments, while bulk fill materials were placed in one, single increment. Fluid flow rate (μl/min) and dentin micropermeability (%) were monitored. The restoration interface was observed under confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results: LC and LBF presented statistically significant higher polymerization stress than HC and HBF. Fluid flow rate and dentin micropermeability did not differ among the groups. However, different patterns of fluid infiltration and interface integrity were observed. HC and HBF presented well-sealed surrounding margins with small gaps along the pulpal wall, while HBF demonstrated more cracks in the adhesive layer. LC and LBF restorations had larger gaps along all bonded interfaces. Conclusion: No difference in polymerization stress was found when conventional and bulk fill composites with similar viscosities were compared. Neither polymerization stress or placement technique demonstrated a significant effect on dentin micropermeability. The incremental placement technique using a conventional, high-viscosity composite exhibited qualitatively better marginal integrity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)355-363
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Adhesive Dentistry
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Dentin
Viscosity
Polymerization
Tooth Root
Pressure
Confocal Microscopy
Adhesives
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Adhesive
  • Bulk-fill composites
  • Composite
  • Dentin permeability
  • Hybrid layer
  • Incremental layering technique
  • Shrinkage stress

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthodontics
  • Oral Surgery
  • Periodontics

Cite this

Effect of composite polymerization stress and placement technique on dentin micropermeability of Class I restorations. / Fronza, Bruna Marin; Abuna, Gabriel Flores; Braga, Roberto Ruggiero; Rueggeberg, Frederick; Giannini, Marcelo.

In: Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, Vol. 20, No. 4, 01.01.2018, p. 355-363.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Fronza, Bruna Marin ; Abuna, Gabriel Flores ; Braga, Roberto Ruggiero ; Rueggeberg, Frederick ; Giannini, Marcelo. / Effect of composite polymerization stress and placement technique on dentin micropermeability of Class I restorations. In: Journal of Adhesive Dentistry. 2018 ; Vol. 20, No. 4. pp. 355-363.
@article{df951d1463b94b6cb0a3636469205c04,
title = "Effect of composite polymerization stress and placement technique on dentin micropermeability of Class I restorations",
abstract = "Purpose: To investigate the effect of polymerization stress and insertion technique on dentin micropermeability of composites placed under pulpal pressure. Materials and Methods: One high-viscosity conventional (HC; Filtek Supreme Ultra; 3M Oral), one low-viscosity conventional (LC; Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable; 3M Oral), one high-viscosity bulk fill (HBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Restorative; 3M Oral), and one low-viscosity bulk fill (LBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable; 3M Oral) composite were evaluated. Polymerization stress was measured with materials bonded to acrylic rods in a universal testing machine (n = 5). Class I preparations were made in extracted molars, in which tooth roots were removed and the pulpal chambers cleaned. Preparations were coupled to a hydraulic device to simulate pulpal pressure during composite placement (n = 5). Conventional composites were placed in two horizontal increments, while bulk fill materials were placed in one, single increment. Fluid flow rate (μl/min) and dentin micropermeability ({\%}) were monitored. The restoration interface was observed under confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results: LC and LBF presented statistically significant higher polymerization stress than HC and HBF. Fluid flow rate and dentin micropermeability did not differ among the groups. However, different patterns of fluid infiltration and interface integrity were observed. HC and HBF presented well-sealed surrounding margins with small gaps along the pulpal wall, while HBF demonstrated more cracks in the adhesive layer. LC and LBF restorations had larger gaps along all bonded interfaces. Conclusion: No difference in polymerization stress was found when conventional and bulk fill composites with similar viscosities were compared. Neither polymerization stress or placement technique demonstrated a significant effect on dentin micropermeability. The incremental placement technique using a conventional, high-viscosity composite exhibited qualitatively better marginal integrity.",
keywords = "Adhesive, Bulk-fill composites, Composite, Dentin permeability, Hybrid layer, Incremental layering technique, Shrinkage stress",
author = "Fronza, {Bruna Marin} and Abuna, {Gabriel Flores} and Braga, {Roberto Ruggiero} and Frederick Rueggeberg and Marcelo Giannini",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3290/j.jad.a40987",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "355--363",
journal = "The journal of adhesive dentistry",
issn = "1461-5185",
publisher = "Quintessence Publishing Company",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of composite polymerization stress and placement technique on dentin micropermeability of Class I restorations

AU - Fronza, Bruna Marin

AU - Abuna, Gabriel Flores

AU - Braga, Roberto Ruggiero

AU - Rueggeberg, Frederick

AU - Giannini, Marcelo

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Purpose: To investigate the effect of polymerization stress and insertion technique on dentin micropermeability of composites placed under pulpal pressure. Materials and Methods: One high-viscosity conventional (HC; Filtek Supreme Ultra; 3M Oral), one low-viscosity conventional (LC; Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable; 3M Oral), one high-viscosity bulk fill (HBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Restorative; 3M Oral), and one low-viscosity bulk fill (LBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable; 3M Oral) composite were evaluated. Polymerization stress was measured with materials bonded to acrylic rods in a universal testing machine (n = 5). Class I preparations were made in extracted molars, in which tooth roots were removed and the pulpal chambers cleaned. Preparations were coupled to a hydraulic device to simulate pulpal pressure during composite placement (n = 5). Conventional composites were placed in two horizontal increments, while bulk fill materials were placed in one, single increment. Fluid flow rate (μl/min) and dentin micropermeability (%) were monitored. The restoration interface was observed under confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results: LC and LBF presented statistically significant higher polymerization stress than HC and HBF. Fluid flow rate and dentin micropermeability did not differ among the groups. However, different patterns of fluid infiltration and interface integrity were observed. HC and HBF presented well-sealed surrounding margins with small gaps along the pulpal wall, while HBF demonstrated more cracks in the adhesive layer. LC and LBF restorations had larger gaps along all bonded interfaces. Conclusion: No difference in polymerization stress was found when conventional and bulk fill composites with similar viscosities were compared. Neither polymerization stress or placement technique demonstrated a significant effect on dentin micropermeability. The incremental placement technique using a conventional, high-viscosity composite exhibited qualitatively better marginal integrity.

AB - Purpose: To investigate the effect of polymerization stress and insertion technique on dentin micropermeability of composites placed under pulpal pressure. Materials and Methods: One high-viscosity conventional (HC; Filtek Supreme Ultra; 3M Oral), one low-viscosity conventional (LC; Filtek Supreme Ultra Flowable; 3M Oral), one high-viscosity bulk fill (HBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Restorative; 3M Oral), and one low-viscosity bulk fill (LBF; Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable; 3M Oral) composite were evaluated. Polymerization stress was measured with materials bonded to acrylic rods in a universal testing machine (n = 5). Class I preparations were made in extracted molars, in which tooth roots were removed and the pulpal chambers cleaned. Preparations were coupled to a hydraulic device to simulate pulpal pressure during composite placement (n = 5). Conventional composites were placed in two horizontal increments, while bulk fill materials were placed in one, single increment. Fluid flow rate (μl/min) and dentin micropermeability (%) were monitored. The restoration interface was observed under confocal laser scanning microscopy. Results: LC and LBF presented statistically significant higher polymerization stress than HC and HBF. Fluid flow rate and dentin micropermeability did not differ among the groups. However, different patterns of fluid infiltration and interface integrity were observed. HC and HBF presented well-sealed surrounding margins with small gaps along the pulpal wall, while HBF demonstrated more cracks in the adhesive layer. LC and LBF restorations had larger gaps along all bonded interfaces. Conclusion: No difference in polymerization stress was found when conventional and bulk fill composites with similar viscosities were compared. Neither polymerization stress or placement technique demonstrated a significant effect on dentin micropermeability. The incremental placement technique using a conventional, high-viscosity composite exhibited qualitatively better marginal integrity.

KW - Adhesive

KW - Bulk-fill composites

KW - Composite

KW - Dentin permeability

KW - Hybrid layer

KW - Incremental layering technique

KW - Shrinkage stress

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053285144&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053285144&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3290/j.jad.a40987

DO - 10.3290/j.jad.a40987

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 355

EP - 363

JO - The journal of adhesive dentistry

JF - The journal of adhesive dentistry

SN - 1461-5185

IS - 4

ER -