Bulk Fill Kompozit Rezinin Farklı Tekniklerle Uygulanmasının Mikrosızıntı Ve Mikrosertlik Üzerine Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı tek tabaka ve tabakalama tekniğiyle uygulanan bulk-fill kompozit rezinin (Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk-Fill; IVW ve IVB, Ivoclar/Vivadent, Liechtenstein) mikrosızıntı ve mikrosertlik özelliklerinin karşılaştırılmasıdır. Yöntem: Çekilmiş 28 adet çürüksüz üçüncü molar diş üzerinde hazırlanan Sınıf I kaviteler (4X4X4mm) sırasıyla 2 ve 4 mm'lik tabakalar halinde iki farklı renkte rezin kompozitle restore edildi. Mikrosızıntı testi için dişler bazik fuksin kullanılarak boya penetrasyonuna tabi tutuldu. Restore edilen dişler daha sonra bukko-lingual yönde ortadan ikiye separe edildi. Mikrosızıntı, stereomikroskop kullanılarak x20 büyütmede değerlendirildi. Separe edilen diş parçaları akrilik rezin bloklara yerleştirildi ve uygulanan kompozitin 1-2-3 mm derinliklerinde mikrosertlik testi gerçekleştirildi ve elde edilen verilere istatistiksel analiz uygulandı (Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test, ANOVA, Bonferroni). Bulgular: Mikrosızıntı testinde tek tabaka ve tabakalama tekniği arasında istatistiksel anlamlı fark görülmedi (p>0.05). Mikrosertlik testinde iki farklı renk (IVW, IVB) kompozit rezin restorasyon arasında benzer şekilde istatistiksel anlamlı fark belirlenmedi (p>0.05). Tek tabaka halinde uygulanan kompozit rezin restorasyonlarda 1,2 ve 3 mm derinliklerinde üst tabakadan alt tabakalara doğru azalan mikrosertlik değerleri arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark belirlendi (p< 0.05). Sonuç: Mikrosızıntı bulguları, farklı uygulama tekniklerinin kompozit rezin materyalin büzülmesi üzerine etkisinin olmadığını ortaya çıkardı. Mikrosertlik bulgularına göre, tek tabaka uygulanan kompozitlerin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı sertlik farklılıklarının olduğu görülmüştür.

The Effect of Different Application Procedures on Microleakage and Microhardness of a Bulk-Fill Composite Material

Introduction: The aim of the study was to compare microleakage and microhardness properties of bulk-fill composite resin (Tetric Evo Ceram Bulk-Fill IVW and IVB, Ivoclar/Vivadent, Liechtenstein) following bulk and incremental insertion techniques. Methods: Class I cavities (4X4X4mm) were prepared in 28 intact caries-free third molars and restored incrementally with horizontal layers of 2mm and bulk technique of 4mm thickness, respectively. To test the microleakage, the teeth were subjected to basic fuchsine dye penetration. They were subsequently sectioned buccolingually. Microleakage was evaluated under stereomicroscope and microhardness was measured by Vickers microhardness test (Shimadzu HMV-2, Japan) on sectioned surfaces of 1-2-3mm depths and analyzed statistically. Results: There was no significant difference among microleakage scores between bulk and incremental insertion techniques (ANOVA p>0.05). In microhardness tests, there was no significant difference between the two shades (IVW, IVB) (ANOVA p>0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in microhardness through the material among 1, 2 and 3 mm depths when bulk insertion technique was used (p< 0.05). Conclusion: Microleakage findings revealed that there was no difference among insertion techniques on shrinkage of the material. There was a statistically significant difference on microhardness through the bulk filled insertion of the tested composite resin.

PDF

___

1. Simon F, Stefanie H, Anne P, Jürg H, et al. Depth of cure of resin composites: Is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials? Dent Mater 2012; 28: 521-528.
2. Moore BK, Platt JA, Borges G, et al. Depth of cure of dental resin composites: ISO 4049 depth and microhardness of types of materials and shades. Oper Dent 2008; 33: 408-412.
3. Versluis A, Douglas WH, Cross M, et al. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996; 75: 871-878.
4. Abbas G, Fleming GJ, Harrington E, et al. Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. J Dent 2003; 31: 437-444.
5. Pilo R, Oelgiesser D, Cardash HS. A survey of output intensity and potential for depth of cure among light-curing units in clinical use. J Dent 1999; 27: 235-241.
6. Campodonico CE, Tantbirojn D, Olin PS, et al. Cuspal deflection and depth of cure in resin-based composite restorations filled by using bulk, incremental and transtooth-illumination techniques. J Am Dent Assoc 2011; 142: 1176-1182.
7. Jain P, Pershing A. Depth of cure and microleakage with high-intensity and ramped resin-based composite curing lights. J Am Dent Assoc 2003; 34: 1215-1223.
8. Yan YL, Kim YK, Kim KH, et al. Changes in degree of conversion and microhardness of dental resin cements. Oper Dent 2010; 35: 203-210.
9. Braga RR, Ballester RY, Ferracane JL. Factors involved in the development of polymerization shrinkage stress in resin-composites:A systematic review. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 962-970.
10. Ikemura K, Endo, T. A review of our development of dental adhesives -- Effects of radical polymerization initiators and adhesive monomers on adhesion. Dent Mater J 2010; 29: 109-121.
11. Cramer NB, Stansbury JW, Bowman CN. Recent advances and developments in composite dental restorative materials. J Dent Res 2011; 90: 402-416.
12. P Mali, Deshpande S, A Singh. Microleakage of restorative materials: An in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2006; 24: 15-18.
13. Eden E, Topaloglu-Ak A, Cuijpers V, et al. Micro-CT for measuring marginal leakage of Class II resin composite restorations in primary molars prepared in vivo. Am J Dent 2008; 21: 393-397.
14. Lazarchik DA, Hammond BD, Sikes LC, et al. Hardness comparison of bulk-filled/transtooth and incremental-filled/occlusally irradiated composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 2007; 98: 129-140.
15. Lee MR, Cho BH, Son HH, et al. Influence of cavity dimension and restoration methods on the cuspal deflection of premolars in composite restoration. Dent Mater 2007; 23: 288-295.
16. Park JK, Chang JH, Ferracane J, et al. How should composite be layered to reduce shrinkage stress, incremental or bulk filling? Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1501-1505.
17. Idriss S, Habib C, Abduljabbar T, et al. Marginal adaptation of class II resin composite restorations using incremental and bulk placement techniques: an ESEM study. J Oral Rehabil 2003; 30: 1000-1007.
18. Sarrett DC. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater 2005; 21: 9-20.
19. Winkler MM, Katona TR, Paydar NH. Finite element stress analysis of three filling techniques for class V light-cured composite restorations. J Dent Res 1996; 75: 1477-1483.
20. Algamaiah H, Sampaio CS, Rigo LC, et al. Microcomputed Tomography Evaluation of Volumetric Shrinkage of Bulk-Fill Composites in Class II Cavities. J Esthet Restor Dent 2016; in press.
21. Poskus LT, Placido E, Cardoso PE. Influence of placement techniques on Vickers and Knoop hardness of Class II composite resin restorations. Dent Mater 2004; 20: 726-732.
22. Tanoue N, Koishi Y, Matsumura H, et al. Curing depth of different shades of a photo-activated prosthetic composite material. J Oral Rehabil 2001; 28: 618-623.