Akıcı Kompozit Rezinler: Bir Literatür Derlemesi

Diş hekimliği pratiğinde akıcı kompozit rezinler son yıllardagiderek popüler olmaya başlamıştır. Akıcı kompozit rezinlervizkoziteleri, biyouyumlulukları ve manipulasyonlarının kolayolması klinikte kullanımını cazip hale getirmektedir ve kullanımalanlarını genişletmektedir. Akıcı kompozit rezinler özellikleri, invitro ve klinik çalışmalarda araştırılmaktadır. Literatürincelendiğinde geleneksel kompozit rezinler hakkında birçokbilgi olmasına rağmen akıcı kompozit rezinler hakkında daha azbilgi vardır. Bu derlemede akıcı kompozit rezinler klinikuygulamaları ve genel özellikleri hakkında bilgi verilmesiamaçlanmıştır.

Flowable Composite Resins: A Literature Review

Recently, flowable composite resins have become increasinglypopular in dental practice. The viscosity, biocompatibility,consistency and ease of manipulation of flowable composite resinsmake it attractive for use in the clinic and broaden their applicationareas. The properties of flowable composite resins are beinginvestigated in in vitro and clinical studies. Although there is a lot ofinformation about traditional composite resins when the literature isinvestigated, there is less information about flowable compositeresins. In this review, it is aimed to give information about theclinical application and general properties of flowable compositeresins.

PDF

___

1. Kamalak H, Altın S, Canbay C. Evaluation of surface porosity of bulk fill flowable composite materials used in dentistry. FU Med J Health Sci. 2017; 31(3): 121–6.
2. Zhou X, Huang X, Li M, Peng X, Wang S, Zhou X, et al. Development and status of resin composite as dental restorative materials. J Appl Polym Sci. 2019; 136(44): 48180.
3. Ashok NG, Jayalakshmi S. Factors that influence the color stability of composite restorations. Int J Orofac Biol. 2017; 1(1): 1-3.
4. Cohen RG. The expanded use of improved flowable composite. Dentaltown.com. 2008; 62–75.
5. Baroudi K, Rodrigues JC. Flowable Resin Composites: A systematic review and clinical considerations. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9(6): 18-24.
6. 6. Savage B, McWhorter AG, Kerins CA, Seale NS. Preventive resin restorations: practice and billing patterns of pediatric dentists. Pediatr Dent. 2009; 31(3): 210-5.
7. Beauchamp J, Caufield PW, Crall JJ, et al. Evidencebased clinical recommendations for the use of pitand-fissure sealants: a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2008; 139(3): 257-68.
8. Bagherian A, Shirazi AS. Flowable composite as fissure sealing material? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br Dent J. 2018; 224(2): 92–7.
9. Tangutoori T, Devendra C, Ravi N, Atul B, Yesh S, Eliezer R. Flowable resin composites-A systematic review and clinical considerations. World J Adv Scı Res. 2018; 1(2): 186–91.
10.Jafarzadeh M, Malekafzali B, Tadayon N, Fallahi S. Retention of a flowable composite resin in comparison to a conventional resin-based sealant: One-year follow-up. J Dent (Tehran). 2010; 7(1): 1-5.
11.Dukic W, Glavina D. Clinical evaluation of three fissure sealants: 24 month follow-up. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2007; 8(3): 163-6.
12.Aguilar FG, Drubi-Filho B, Casemiro LA, Watanabe MG, Pires-de-Souza FC. Retention and penetration of a conventional resin-based sealant and a photochromatic flowable composite resin placed on occlusal pits and fissures. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2007; 25(4): 169-73.
13.Babaji P, Vaid S, Deep S, Mishra S, Srivastava M, Manjooran T. In vitro evaluation of shear bond strength and microleakage of different pit and fissure sealants. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2016; 6(Suppl 2): 111-5
14.Corona SA, Borsatto MC, Garcia L, Ramos RP, Palma-Dibb RG. Randomized, controlled trial comparing the retention of a flowable restorative system with a conventional resin sealant: oneyear follow up. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2005; 15(1): 44-50.
15.Kucukyilmaz E, Savas S. Evaluation of different fissure sealant materials and flowable composites used as pit-and-fissure sealants: A 24-month clinical trial. Pediatr Dent. 2015; 37(5): 468-73.
16.Bagherian A, Shirazi AS, Sadeghi R. Adhesive systems under fissure sealants: Yes or no? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Dent Assoc. 2016; 147(6): 446–56.
17.Mathur S, Pandit IK, Srivatava N, Gugnani N, Gupta M. Clinical evaluation of various recently used pit and fissure sealants: A 12-month study. Int J Clin Dent. 2012; 5(3): 253–62.
18.Christensen GJ. Preventing postoperative tooth sensitivity in class I, II and V restorations. J Am Dent Assoc. 2002; 133(2): 229-31.
19.Boruziniat A, Gharaee S, Shirazi AS, Majidinia S, Vatanpour M. Evaluation of the efficacy of flowable composite as lining material on microleakage of composite resin restorations: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Quintessence Int. 2016; 47(2): 93–101.
20.Saraswathi M, Ballal N, Jacob G. Evaluation of the influence of flowable liner and two different adhesive systems on the microleakage of packable composite resin. J Interdiscip Dentistry. 2012; 2(2): 98.
21.Kasraei S, Azarsina M, Majidi S. In vitro comparison of microleakage of posterior resin composites with and without liner using two-step etch-and-rinse and self-etch dentin adhesive systems. Oper Dent. 2011; 36(2): 213-21.
22.Bore Gowda V, Sreenivasa Murthy BV, Hegde S, Venkataramanaswamy SD, Pai VS, Krishna R. Evaluation of gingival microleakage in class ıı composite restorations with different lining techniques: An in vitro study. Scientifica (Cairo). 2015; 2015: 896507.
23.Unterbrink GL, Liebenberg WH. Flowable resin composites as "filled adhesives": literature review and clinical recommendations. Quintessence Int. 1999; 30(4): 249-57.
24.Leevailoj C, Cochran MA, Matis BA, Moore BK, Platt JA. Microleakage of posterior packable resin composites with and without flowable liners. Oper Dent. 2001; 26(3): 302-7.
25.Van Dijken JW, Pallesen U. Clinical performance of a hybrid resin composite with and without an intermediate layer of flowable resin composite: a 7-year evaluation. Dent Mater. 2011; 27(2): 150-6.
26.Abiodun-Solanke IMF, Ajayi D, Arigbede, AO. Nanotechnology and its application in dentistry. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014; 4(3): 171-7.
27.Karaman E, Özgünaltay G, Dayangaç B, Yazici R. Çürüksüz servikal lezyonlara self-etch adeziv sistem ile uygulanan farklı yapıdaki kompozit rezin restorasyonların 12 aylık klinik değerlendirmesi. GÜ Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2011; 28(3): 183–90.
28.McCoy RB, Anderson MH, Lepe X, Johnson GH. Clinical success of class V composite resin restorations without mechanical retention. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998; 129(5): 593-9.
29.Alwadai MHD. Restorative materials for non-carious cervical lesions: A review. Int J Clin Den Sci 2018; 7: 1-5.
30.Estafan D, Schulman A, Calamia J. Clinical effectiveness of a Class V flowable composite resin system. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 1999; 20: 11–5.
31.Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y. Three-year clinical evaluation of a flowable and a hybrid resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. 2010; 38(3): 191-200.
32.Karaman E, Yazici AR, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B. Clinical evaluation of a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions: 24- month results. J Adhes Dent. 2012; 14(5): 485-92
33.Canali GD, Ignácio SA, Rached RN, Souza EM. Oneyear clinical evaluation of bulk-fill flowable vs. regular nanofilled composite in non-carious cervical lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 23(2): 889-97.
34.Cieplik F, Scholz KJ, Tabenski I, et al. Flowable composites for restoration of non-carious cervical lesions: Results after five years. Dent Mater. 2017; 33(12): 428-37.
35.Morgan MM, Brown DJ, Suh BI. Immediate Dentin Sealing (IDS). Inside Dentistry. 2010; 6(3).
36.Nikaido T, Tagami J, Yatani H, et al. Concept and clinical application of the resin-coating technique for indirect restorations. Dent Mater J. 2018; 37(2): 192-6.
37.Nikaido T, Takahashi R, Ariyoshi M, Sadr A, Tagami, J. Protection and Reinforcement of Tooth Structures by Dental Coating Materials. Coatings. 2012; 2(4): 210–20
38.Murata T, Maseki T, Nara Y. Effect of immediate dentin sealing applications on bonding of CAD/CAM ceramic onlay restoration. Dent Mater J. 2018; 37(6): 928-39.
39.Coachman C, De Arbeloa L, Mahn G, Sulaiman TA, Mahn E. An Improved Direct Injection Technique With Flowable Composites. A Digital Workflow Case Report. Oper Dent. 2020; 45(3): 235-42.
40.Terry DA, Powers JM. A predictable resin composite injection technique, part I. Dent Today. 2014; 33(4): 96-101
41.Terry DA, Powers JM, Mehta D, Babu V. A predictable resin composite injection technique, part 2. Dent Today. 2014; 33(8): 12.
42.Tabrizi S, Salemis E, Usumez S. Flowable composites for bonding orthodontic retainers. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80(1): 195-200.
43.D'Attilio M, Traini T, Di Iorio D, Varvara G, Festa F, Tecco S. Shear bond strength, bond failure, and scanning electron microscopy analysis of a new flowable composite for orthodontic use. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75(3): 410-5.
44.Ryou DB, Park HS, Kim KH, Kwon TY. Use of flowable composites for orthodontic bracket bonding. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78(6): 1105-9.
45.Geserick M, Wichelhaus A. A color-reactivated flowable composite for bonding lingual retainers. J Clin Orthod. 2004; 38(3): 165-6.
46.Attar N, Tam LE, McComb D. Flow, strength, stiffness and radiopacity of flowable resin composites. J Can Dent Assoc. 2003; 69(8): 516-521.
47.Balos S, Pilić B, Petronijević B, Marković D, Mirković S, Sarcev I. Improving mechanical properties of flowable dental composite resin by adding silica nanoparticles. Vojnosanitetski Pregled. 2013; 70(5): 477–83.
48.Alrobeigy N. Mechanical properties of contemporary resin composites determined by nanoindentation. Tanta Dent J. 2017; 14(3): 129.
49.Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of firstgeneration flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc. 1998; 129(5): 567–77.
50.Hirayama S, Iwai H, Tanimoto Y. Mechanical evaluation of five flowable resin composites by the dynamic micro-indentation method. J Dent Biomech. 2014; 5: 1758736014533983.
51.Bonilla ED, Yashar M, Caputo AA. Fracture toughness of nine flowable resin composites. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89(3): 261-7.
52.Baroudi K, Silikas N, Watts DC. Edge-strength of flowable resin-composites. J Dent. 2008; 36(1): 63–8.
53.Burke FJ, Wilson NH, Cheung SW, Mjör IA. Influence of patient factors on age of restorations at failure and reasons for their placement and replacement. J Dent. 2001; 29(5): 317–24.
54.Tavassoli Hojati S, Alaghemand H, Hamze F, et al. Antibacterial, physical and mechanical properties of flowable resin composites containing zinc oxide nanoparticles. Dent Mater. 2013; 29(5): 495-505.
55.Yusoff NM, Johari Y, Ab Rahman I, Mohamad D, Khamis MF, Ariffin Z, et al. Physical and mechanical properties of flowable composite incorporated with nanohybrid silica synthesised from rice husk. J Mater Res Technol. 2019; 8(3): 2777–85.
56.Braga RR, Hilton TJ, Ferracane JL. Contraction stress of flowable composite materials and their efficacy as stress-relieving layers. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003; 134(6): 721–8.
57.Cadenaro M, Marchesi G, Antoniolli F, Davidson C, De Stefano Dorigo E, Breschi L. Flowability of composites is no guarantee for contraction stress reduction. Dent Mater. 2009; 25(5): 649–54.
58.Beun S, Bailly C, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physical, mechanical and rheological characterization of resin-based pit and fissure sealants compared to flowable resin composites. Dent Mater. 2012; 28(4): 349–59.
59.Xavier JC, De Melo Monteiro GQ, Montes MAJR. (2010). Polymerization shrinkage and flexural modulus of flowable dental composites. Mat Res. 2010; 13(3): 381–4.
60.Ölmez A, Kisbet S. Advancements in finishing and polishing procedures for composite resin restorations. Acta Odontol Turc. 2013; 30(2): 115– 22.
61.Salerno M, Derchi G, Thorat S, Ceseracciu L, Ruffilli R, Barone AC. Surface morphology and mechanical properties of new-generation flowable resin composites for dental restoration. Dent Mater. 2011; 27(12): 1221-8.
62.Garcia FC, Wang L, D'Alpino PH, Souza JB, Araújo PA, Mondelli RF. Evaluation of the roughness and mass loss of the flowable composites after simulated toothbrushing abrasion. Braz Oral Res. 2004; 18(2): 156-61.
63.Clelland NL, Pagnotto MP, Kerby RE, Seghi RR. Relative wear of flowable and highly filled composite. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 93(2): 153-7.
64.Chakalov I, Koleva P, Gerzhikov I, Apostolov N. Comparison between relative wear resistance of flowable and highly filled composite. Medinform. 2019; 6(1): 948–54.
65.Yilmaz EC, Sadeler R. Investigation of two- and three-body wear resistance on flowable bulk-fill and resin-based composites. Mech Compos Mater. 2018; 54(3): 395–402.
66.Engelhardt F, Hahnel S, Preis V, Rosentritt M. Comparison of flowable bulk-fill and flowable resinbased composites: an in vitro analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2016; 20(8): 2123-30.
67.Han L, Okamoto A, Fukushima M, Okiji T. Evaluation of flowable resin composite surfaces eroded by acidic and alcoholic drinks. Dent Mater J. 2008; 27(3): 455-65.
68.Ku RM, Ko CC, Jeong CM, Park MG, Kim HI, Kwon YH. Effect of flowability on the flow rate, polymerization shrinkage, and mass change of flowable composites. Dent Mater J. 2015; 34(2): 168-74.
69.Radz G. An Improved bonding system and flowable composite for fast, effective class V restorations. Inside Dentistry; 2006; 2(5).
70.Baroudi K, Silikas N, Watts DC. Time-dependent visco-elastic creep and recovery of flowable composites. Eur J Oral Sci. 2007; 115(6): 517–21.
71.Ikeda I, Otsuki M, Sadr A, Nomura T, Kishikawa R, Tagami J. Effect of filler content of flowable composites on resin-cavity interface. Dent Mater J. 2009; 28(6): 679-85
72.Gonçalves F, Kawano Y, Braga RR. Contraction stress related to composite inorganic content.
Dent Mater. 2010; 26(7): 704-9.
73.Bukovinszky K, Molnár L, Bakó J, Szalóki M,
Hegedus C. Comparative study of polymerization shrinkage and related properties of flowable composites and an unfilled resin. Fogorv Sz. 2014; 107(1): 3-8.
74.Stavridakis MM, Dietschi D, Krejci I. Polymerization shrinkage of flowable resin-based restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2005; 30(1): 118-28.
75.Helvatjoglu-Antoniades M, Papadogiannis Y, Lakes RS, Dionysopoulos P, Papadogiannis D. Dynamic and static elastic moduli of packable and flowable composite resins and their development after initial photo curing. Dent Mater. 2006; 22(5): 450-9.
76.Takamizawa T, Yamamoto A, Inoue N, et al. Influence of light intensity on contraction stress of flowable resins. J Oral Sci. 2008; 50(1): 37-43.
77.Lee IB, Son HH, Um CM. Rheologic properties of flowable, conventional hybrid, and condensable composite resins. Dent Mater. 2003; 19(4): 298- 307.
78.Moon PC, Tabassian MS, Culbreath TE. Flow characteristics and film thickness of flowable resin composites. Oper Dent. 2002; 27(3): 248- 53.
79.Baroudi K, Silikas N, Watts DC. Time-dependent visco-elastic creep and recovery of flowable composites. Eur J Oral Sci. 2007; 115(6): 517–21.
80.Marghalani HY, Watts DC. Viscoelastic stability of resin-composites aged in food-simulating solvents. Dent Mater. 2013; 29(9): 963-70.
81.El-Safty S, Silikas N, Watts DC. Temperaturedependence of creep behaviour of dental resincomposites. J Dent. 2013; 41(4): 287-96.
82.Ku RM, Ko CC, Jeong CM, Park MG, Kim HI, Kwon YH. Effect of flowability on the flow rate, polymerization shrinkage, and mass change of flowable composites. Dent Mater J. 2015; 34(2): 168-74.
83.Mali P, Deshpande S, Singh A. Microleakage of restorative materials: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2006; 24(1): 15-8.
84.Youssef MN, Youssef FA, Souza-Zaroni WC, Turbino ML, Vieira MM. Effect of enamel preparation method on in vitro marginal microleakage of a flowable composite used as pit and fissure sealant. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2006; 16(5): 342-7.
85.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(10): 962–70.
86.Lokhande NA, Padmai AS, Rathore VP, Shingane S, Jayashankar DN, Sharma U. Effectiveness of flowable resin composite in reducing microleakage - an in vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2014; 6(3): 111-4.
87.Kwon HB, Park KT. SEM and microleakage evaluation of 3 flowable composites as sealants without using bonding agents. Pediatr Dent. 2006; 28(1): 48-53.
88.Ascensión V, Ortiz AJ, Bravo LA. Microleakage beneath brackets bonded with flowable materials: effect of thermocycling. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31(4): 390–6.
89.Yazici AR, Celik C, Dayangac B, Ozgunaltay G. Effects of different light curing units/modes on the microleakage of flowable composite resins. Eur J Dent. 2008; 2(4): 240-6.
90.Kubo S, Yokota H, Yokota H, Hayashi Y. Microleakage of cervical cavities restored with flowable composites. Am J Dent. 2004; 17(1): 33-7.
91.Chimello DT, Chinelatti MA, Ramos RP, Palma Dibb RG. In vitro evaluation of microleakage of a flowable composite in Class V restorations. Braz Dent J. 2002; 13(3): 184-7.
92.Qin M, Liu H. Clinical evaluation of a flowable resin composite and flowable compomer for preventive resin restorations. Oper Dent. 2005; 30(5): 580-7.
93.Xie H, Zhang F, Wu Y, Chen C, Liu W. Dentine bond strength and microleakage of flowable composite, compomer and glass ionomer cement. Aust Dent J. 2008; 53(4): 325-31.
94.Arslan S, Demirbuga S, Ustun Y, Dincer A, Canakci B, Zorba Y. The effect of a new-generation flowable composite resin on microleakage in Class V composite restorations as an intermediate layer. J Conserv Dent. 2013; 16(3): 189-93.
95.Scotti N, Comba A, Gambino A, et al. Microleakage at enamel and dentin margins with a bulk fills flowable resin. Eur J Dent. 2014; 8(1): 1-8.
96.Gönülol N, Ertan Ertaş E, Yılmaz A, Çankaya S. Effect of thermal aging on microleakage of current flowable composite resins. J Dent Sci. 2015; 10: 376–82.
97.Peşkersoy C, Yıldırım G, Özata F, Önal B. Üç farklı akışkan kompozitin ve bir kendinden adezivli akışkan kompozitin sınıf V restorasyonlardaki mikrosızıntı değerlerinin invitro olarak incelenmesi. EÜ Diş Hek Fak Derg 2013; 34: 99–104.
98.Ergücü Z, Türkün LS, Onem E, Güneri P. Comparative radiopacity of six flowable resin composites. Oper Dent. 2010; 35(4): 436-40.
99.Hara AT, Serra MC, Haiter-Neto F, Rodrigues AL Jr. Radiopacity of esthetic restorative materials compared with human tooth structure. Am J Dent. 2001; 14(6): 383-6.
100. Bouschlicher MR, Cobb DS, Boyer DB. Radiopacity of compomers, flowable and conventional resin composites for posterior restorations. Oper Dent. 1999; 24(1): 20–5.
101. Imperiano MT, Khoury HJ, Pontual MLA, Montes M, da Silveira MMF. Comparative radiopacity of four low-viscosity composites. Braz J Oral Sci. 2007; 6(20): 82.
102. Espelid I, Tveit AB, Erickson RL, Keck SC, Glasspoole EA. Radiopacity of restorations and detection of secondary caries. Dent Mater. 1991; 7(2): 114-7.
103. Watts DC, McCabe JF. Aluminium radiopacity standards for dentistry: an international survey. J Dent. 1999; 27(1): 73-8.
104. Koliniotou-Koumpia E, Pavlos D, Serafim P, Effimia K, Dimitrios D. Sealing effectiveness of two liners and one flowable composite resin in vivo in class V restorations. Hellenic Dent J. 2006; 16: 11-6.
105. Üçtaşli M, Öztaş B. Farklı yapıda diş renginde restoratif materyallerin radyoopasitelerinin değerlendirilmesi. AÜ Diş Hek Fak Derg. 2001; 28(2): 123–30.
106. Yildirim D, Gormez O, Yildiz G, Ermis R. Comparison of radiopacities of different flowable resin composites. J Oral Maxillofac Radiol. 2014; 2(1): 21-5.
107. Willems G, Noack MJ, Inokoshi S, et al. Radiopacity of composites compared with human enamel and dentine. J Dent. 1991; 19(6): 362-5
108. Hitij T, Fidler A. Radiopacity of dental restorative materials. Clin Oral Investig. 2013; 17(4): 1167-77.
109. ISO 4049 Dentistry. ISO 4049 Dentistrypolymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. 2000; 1-22.
110. Cantürk D, Yılmaz M, Cantürk F, Özakar İlday N, Seven N. Comparative radiopacities of five flowable resin composites. J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni. 2020; 30(3): 418-23.
111. Salzedas LM, Louzada MJ, de Oliveira Filho AB. Radiopacity of restorative materials using digital images. J Appl Oral Sci. 2006; 14(2): 147- 52.
112. Nasim I, Neelakantan P, Sujeer R, Subbarao CV. Color stability of microfilled, microhybrid and nanocomposite resins--an in vitro study. J Dent. 2010; 38 (Suppl 2): 137-42.
113. Arregui M, Giner L, Ferrari M, Vallés M, Mercadé M. Six-month color change and water sorption of 9 new-generation flowable composites in 6 staining solutions. Braz Oral Res. 2016; 30(1): e123.
114. Yu B, Lee YK. Differences in color, translucency and fluorescence between flowable and universal resin composites. J Dent. 2008; 36(10): 840-6.
115. Korkmaz Ceyhan Y, Ontiveros JC, Powers JM, Paravina RD. Accelerated aging effects on color and translucency of flowable composites. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2014; 26(4): 272-8.
116. Dos Santos PA, Palma Dibb RG, Corona SAM, Catirse ABE, Garcia PPNS. Influence of fluoridecontaining solutions on the translucency of flowable composite resins. J Mater Sci. 2003; 38: 3765–8.
117. Malek Afzali B, Ghasemi A, Mirani A, Abdolazimi Z, Akbarzade Baghban A, Kharazifard MJ. Effect of ingested liquids on color change of composite resins. J Dent (Tehran). 2015; 12(8): 577-84.
118. Sousa SEP, Da Costa ES, Borges BCD, De Assunção IV, Dos Santos AJS. Staining resistance of preheated flowable composites to drinking pigmented beverages. Revista Portuguesa De Estomatologia, Medicina Dentária E Cirurgia Maxilofacial. 2015; 56: 221-5.
119. Daronch M, Rueggeberg FA, De Goes MF, Giudici R. Polymerization kinetics of pre-heated composite. J Dent Res. 2006; 85(1): 38-43.
120. Demirci T, Gürbüz T, Şengül F. Cytotoxicity of dental resin composites: An in vitro study. J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni. 2015; 24(1): 10–5.
121. Tuncer S, Demirci M. The evaluatıon of dental materials biocompatibility. J Dent Fac Atatürk Uni. 2011;21(2): 141-9.
122. Al-Hiyasat AS, Darmani, H, Milhem MM. Cytotoxicity evaluation of dental resin composites and their flowable derivatives. Clin Oral Investig. 2005;9(1):21-5.
123. Hegde MN, Wali A. BisGMA and TEGDMA elution from two flowable nanohybrid resin composites: An in vitro study. JAMMR. 2014; 5(9): 1096-104.
124. Yalcin M, Ulker M, Ulker E, Sengun A. Evaluation of cytotoxicity of six different flowable composites with the methyl tetrazolium test method. Eur J Gen Dent. 2013; 2(3): 292-5.
125. Baroudi K, Silikas N, Watts DC. In vitro pulp chamber temperature rise from irradiation and exotherm of flowable composites. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2009; 19(1): 48–54.
126. Al-Qudah AA, Mitchell CA, Biagioni PA, Hussey DL. Thermographic investigation of contemporary resin-containing dental materials. J Dent. 2005; 33(7): 593–602.
127. Atalayın Ç, Tezel H, Ergücü Z. Rezin esaslı dental materyallerin sitotoksisitesine genel bir bakış. EÜ Dişhek Fak Derg. 2016; 37(2): 47–53.
128. Srivastava VK, Singh RK, Malhotra SN, Singh A. To evaluate cytotoxicity of resin-based restorative materials on human lymphocytes by trypan blue exclusion test: An in vitro study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2010; 3(3): 147-52.
129. Wataha JC, Lockwood PE, Bouillaguet S, Noda M. In vitro biological response to core and flowable dental restorative materials. Dent Mater. 2003; 19(1): 25-31.
130. Trichaiyapon V, Torrungruang K, Panitvisai P. Cytotoxicity of flowable resin composite on cultured human periodontal ligament cells compared with mineral trioxide aggregate. J Investig Clin Dent. 2012; 3(3): 215-20.
131. Zorba YO, Yildiz M, Yildirim A, Gursan N, Ercan E. Reactions of connective tissue to selfetching/ priming dentin bonding systems: Oxidative stress, tumor necrosis factor α expression, and tissue reactions. J Dent Sci. 2009; 4(3): 136–48