IADR Abstract Archives

Bulk Fill resins, Systematic review

Objectives: Objective: To perform a systematic review of the current literature regarding RBF, detailing its characteristics, forms of uses and results obtained in previous research.
Methods: Material and methods: Medline and Scielo databases were searched using the keywords "bulk fill", "composites", "clinical" and "resin". We included articles from 2016 to the date whose content was in accordance with the objectives of this work. We selected 23 articles. Characteristics and results reported statistically significant were tabulated.
Results: Results: RBFs include low and high viscosity materials, which have in common that they can be cured in layers up to 4 mm. These present different compositions which leads to dissimilar results when evaluating the characteristics. In vitro studies have compared this group to conventional resins in parameters such as: fracture strength, microhardness, water absorption, color changes, wear resistance, polymerization contraction and curing depth. Its degree of conversion, radiopacity and influence of photopolymerization have also been studied. Clinical evaluations have been carried out for up to 5 years. In most studies they offer results similar to conventional resins.
Conclusions: Conclusions: RBF is a heterogeneous group that requires an individual study. The in vitro and clinical experience supports the use of some of these as they offer potential advantages without significantly altering their properties. It is necessary for the dentist to report on each one to choose the correct alternative according to the clinical case.

Division: Chilean Division Meeting
Meeting: 2017 Chilean Division Meeting (Santiago, Chile)
Location: Santiago, Chile
Year: 2017
Final Presentation ID: 80
Abstract Category|Abstract Category(s): Dental Materials 2:Polymer-based Materials

Authors

Parada Suazo, Karina ( Universidad de Concepción , Chillán , Ñuble , Chile )

Avaria, Michele ( Universidad de Concepción , Concepción , Concepción , Chile )

Aránguiz, Osvaldo ( Universidad de Concepción , Chiguayante , Bio Bio , Chile )

Financial Interest Disclosure: none

SESSION INFORMATION

Poster Session
Resúmenes

TABLES

Statistically significant results found

Authors and year	Type of study	Comparison element used	Bulk Fill used	(N)	Property Evaluated	Results
Jung Jh. et al, 2017	In vitro	Filtek Z350 SDR VBF	TEB SF	n=40	polymerization contraction Marginal Adaptation Flexural modulus	Better results Bulk Fill Normal Viscosity
Fronza BM. et Al, 2017	In vitro	Herculite Classic	SDR FBF TEB EVER-X	n=5	Inorganic content Transmission of light Flexural strength	Better results Bulk Fill compared to conventional resin
Mosharrafian S. et al, 2016	In vitro	Filtek Z250	SF FBF	n=39	Strength of adhesion to intracanal dentin in primary dentition	Similar results
Koc- Vural U. et al, 2017	In vitro	Filtek Ultimate Herculite XRV Ultra Reflectys	TEB	N=72	Ability to bond conventional resins with Bulk Fill resins	Higher bond strength of resins repaired with TEB
Yildirim T. et al, 2017	In vitro	Enamel Dentine	BBF SDR FBF X-TRAB	n=6	Radiopacity	Greater and adequate radiopacity.
Moharam M. et al, 2017	In vitro	Filtek Z250	X-TRAF SF	n=60	Vickers surface microhardness Depth of curing	Significant difference with respect to conventional resin, being greater in the Bulk Fill
Alkhudhairy F., 2017	In vitro	curing light 1200 mW/ cm2 curing light 650 mW/ cm2	TEB SF SDR FBFF	n=288	Effects of two curing light intensities on the mechanical properties	At higher light intensity, greater tensile strength and compression
Gamarra V. et al, 2017	In vitro	Different Powers and Polymerization Times	SF	n=40	Marginal adaptation with different polymerization techniques	There are no significant differences
Par M. et al, 2017	In vitro	TEB	SDR	n=4	Degree of post-cure conversion (DC)	At 7 days, the final conversion for SDR and at 24 hours for TEB were obtained, depending on the depth DC for the latter
Van Ende A. et al. 2017	In vitro	Filtek Z100 G-ænial Universal Flow	TEB SDR	n=80	Evaluate interfacial disunion at different depths and with different compounds	Greater disunion at greater depth and using conventional resin
Alkhudhairy F. 2017	In vitro	Different Powers and Polymerization Times	TEB SDR FBFF	N=96	Evaluate wear resistance with different potencies and polymerization times	Higher intensity did not have a positive impact on wear resistance
Arregui M. et al, 2016	In vitro	Filtek Supreme XTE Tetric Evoflow Venus diamond Flow Premise Flowable	FBFF VBF SDR SF	N=60	Color change and water absorption in 6 months	Changes within parameters compared to conventional resins
Algamaiah H. et al, 2016	In vitro	Vitalescence	TEB SDR FBF	N=48	Polymerization contraction	Lower TEB contraction, the rest of the resins showed a contraction similar to the conventional resin
Behery H et al, 2016	In vitro	Filtek LS	QuiXX S-TRAF TEB	n=40	Restored premolded cubic deflection	Higher Bulk Fill deflection relative to silorane resin
Bayraktar Y. et al, 2016	In vivo	Clearfil Phot Posterior Filtek P60	FBF TEB SF	n=200	Clinical performance at 1 year	Similar results on different resins
Van Dikjen JW. et al, 2016	In vivo	Ceram X mono	SDR	n=100	Clinical performance at 5 years	Similar results on different resins
Karaman E. et al, 2017	In vivo	GrandioSO Aelite Flo	X-TRAB	n=47	Clinical performance at 3 years in endodontically treated teeth	Similar results on different resins
Atalay C. et al, 2016	In vitro	Tetric N- Ceram G-ænial posterior	FDF SDR	n=72	Endodontically treated teeth fracture resistance.	Similar results on different resins
Charamba C. Et al 2017	In vitro	Filtek Z250 XT	FBFF X-TRAF	n=15	Dentin bond strength	Bulk-Fill Showed higher values of bond strength.
Nascimiento A. Et al 2016	In vitro	Filtek Z350	FBFF SDR X-TRAB	n=40	Marginal microleakage	Similar results
Rauber G. et al 2016	In vitro	teeth Tetric N-Ceram	TEB	n=28	Restoration of restored teeth	Similar results between resins, best tooth not restored
Dionysopoulos D. et al, 2016	In vitro	Filtek Z550 – FZ	X-TRAF EverX TEB BBF BBR X-trab FBFF VBF	n=45	Evaluate polymerization efficiency and how its composition, temperature and post-irradiation polymerization influence	The composition affects polymerization efficiency, Most did not reach a curing depth of 4 mm (based on microhardness measurements), preheating at 54 ° C increases its microhardness. After 24 h there is an increase in microhardness due to Post-irradiation polymerization depending on the material
Rosas A. et al, 2016	In vitro	FiltekTM P60	SF	n=16	Marginal stability	Similar in occlusal surface caval edge, better P60 stability in gingival superficial cavus border

Resins study: -SureFil ® SDR flow, Dentsply (SDR) Fluid viscosity.-X-TRA BASE ® VOCO, (X-trab) Fluid viscosity. -Filtek™ Bulk Fill Flowable, 3M ESPE, (FBFF), Fluid viscosity, Venus® Bulk Fill, Heraeus Kulzer (VBF) Fluid viscosity. -EverX Posterior GC, EverX, Fluid viscosity. -Beautifil Bulk Flowable, SHOFU, (BBF) Fluid viscosity. -Beautifil Bulk Restorative, SHOFU, (BBR) Normal viscosity.-Tetric Evoceram® BulkFill Ivoclar Vivadent, (TEB) Normal viscosity.-X-Tra Fill, VOCO, (X-TRAF) Normal viscosity. - QuiXX ® , Dentsply, (QUIXX) Normal viscosity. -Filtek™ Bulk Fill 3M ESPE, (FBFF ), Normal viscosity. -SonicFill™, Kerr, (SF), Fluid viscosity With sonic activation.