Objective: To compare the physical properties of new dual-cure, bulk-fill restorative composites (Injectafil DC, Apex; Hyperfill, Parkell) to a hybrid composite material (Filtek Z250, 3M/ESPE). Method: Depth of cure, volumetric shrinkage, fracture toughness, porosity, and microleakage were examined. For depth of cure, a cylindrical mold (4x14mm long) was filled with composite and light-cured for 20 secs (40 secs for Hyperfill) at 1200 mW/cm2 (Bluephase G2, Ivoclar) or allowed to self-cure (n=5). Uncured composite was removed and remaining polymerized composite was measured and divided by two. For volumetric shrinkage, composite was placed in a video-imaging device (AcuVol, Bisco) and light-cured or allowed to self-cure. Shrinkage was recorded continuously for ten minutes (n=10). For fracture toughness, single-edge notched-beam specimens were created in a mold (2.5x5x25mm), light-cured or allowed to self-cure, stored for 24-hours at 37oC in water, and tested in 3-point flexure (n=10). For porosity, specimens were created in a proximal slot preparation in an extracted human third molar. Composite was incrementally placed and light-cured (Z250) or placed in bulk (Hyperfill, Injectafil) and light-cured or allowed to self-cure. The teeth were scanned with a microtomographic unit (Bruker) for porosity formation, then thermocycled, placed in dye, sectioned, and analyzed for microleakage using Image J software (NIH). Dye penetration was expressed as a percentage of the length of microleakage divided by the length of the restorative interface (n=10). A mean and standard deviation were determined per group. Data was analyzed with ANOVA/Tukey’s test per property (alpha=0.05). Percent porosity was evaluated with a Kruskal-Wallis/Mann-Whitney U test (alpha=0.005). Result: Significant differences were found between groups per property. See table. Conclusion: Compared to the incrementally placed composite (Filtek Z250), the new dual-cure, bulk-fill restorative composites (Hyperfill, Injectafil) in self-cure mode had complete depth of cure, similar fracture toughness and porosity formation, but greater polymerization shrinkage and microleakage.
Restorative Material
|
Physical Property Mean (std dev) |
||||
Depth of Cure (mm) |
Volumetric Polymerization Shrinkage (%) |
Porosity (%) |
Fracture Toughness (MPa m1/2) |
Microleakage (%) |
|
Hyperfill Light Cured (Universal) |
2.36 (0.10) b |
2.9 (0.4) ab |
0.16 (0.36) a |
1.85 (0.17) a |
43% (30%) c |
Hyperfill Self Cured (Universal) |
Full Cure |
3.6 (0.7) b |
0.36 (0.26) ab |
1.87 (0.26) a |
48% (28%) c |
Injectafil DC Light Cure (Universal) |
2.06 (0.04) c |
5.2 (0.5) c |
0.28 (0.19) ab |
1.83 (0.57) a |
38% (27%) bc |
Injectafil DC Self Cured (Universal) |
Full Cure |
3.1 (0.6) b |
0.43 (0.21) b |
1.61 (0.24) a |
39% (33%) bc |
Filtek Z250 (A2) |
3.57 (0.02) a |
2.3 (0.3) a |
0.69 (0.83) b |
1.81 (0.17) a |
22% (20%) a |
Groups with the same letter per column are not significantly different (p>0.05) |
|||||