Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites in class II cavities placed with different adhesive strategies

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 04 February 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites to enamel and dentin with a self-etch (SE) and an etch-and-rinse adhesive (ER) without and with artificial aging. 128 MOD cavities in extracted human molars were prepared, randomly assigned to 8 groups (n = 16), bonded with either OptiBond FL (OFL, ER) or Xeno V+ (X, SE), and restored in 4 mm horizontal bulk layers with SonicFill (SF), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk fill (TEC), and x-tra fil (XF). Incremental layering technique with Premise (P) served as control. Half of the specimens each (n = 8) were subjected either to water storage (1 day, 37 °C) or prolonged storage (180 days) and thereafter thermocycling. Replicas were analyzed for marginal gap formation. After sectioning, interfacial adhesive defects were assessed. Results were statistical analyzed. (1) Internal adaptation: Except for TEC/OFL at enamel without artificial aging, no significant differences between bulk-fill composites and the control were observed. All groups at dentin with OFL showed less internal adhesive defects than that with X (p < 0.05). (2) Marginal adaptation: No significant differences were observed between bulk-fill composites and control except for P after artificial aging (p > 0.05). All other composites, regardless of artificial aging, formed significantly more marginal gaps at enamel with X compared to with OFL (p ≤ 0.05). Simplified restorations with high-viscosity bulk-fill composite showed comparable internal and marginal adaptation to incrementally placed fillings. A superiority of the 3-step ER approach was seen compared to the 1-step SE adhesive irrespective of the bulk-fill composite used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 04 February 2019

    In the original publication of the article the paragraph “The four resin-based composites…” appearing below the “Materials and methods” section is incomplete. The correct paragraph is provided in this correction below.

References

  1. Opdam NJM, van de Sande FH, Bronkhorst E, Cenci MS, Bottenberg P, Pallesen U, Gaengler P, Lindberg A, Huysmans MCDNJM, van Dijken JW. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2014;93:943–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034514544217.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. van Dijken JW. Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent. 2000;28:299–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Demarco FF, Corrêa MB, Cenci MS, Moraes RR, Opdam NJM. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater. 2012;28:87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.09.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. el-Mowafy OM, Lewis DW, Benmergui C, Levinton C. Meta-analysis on long-term clinical performance of posterior composite restorations. J Dent. 1994;22:33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cardoso MV, Almeida Neves A de, Mine A, Coutinho E, van Landuyt K, Munck J de, van Meerbeek B. Current aspects on bonding effectiveness and stability in adhesive dentistry. Aust Dent J. 2011;56(Suppl 1):31–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2011.01294.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ferracane JL. Developing a more complete understanding of stresses produced in dental composites during polymerization. Dent Mater. 2005;21:36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.10.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Park J, Chang J, Ferracane J, Lee IB. How should composite be layered to reduce shrinkage stress: incremental or bulk filling? Dent Mater. 2008;24:1501–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2008.03.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abbas G, Fleming GJP, Harrington E, Shortall ACC, Burke FJT. Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. J Dent. 2003;31:437–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kemp-Scholte CM, Davidson CL. Complete marginal seal of Class V resin composite restorations effected by increased flexibility. J Dent Res. 1990;69:1240–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Oliveira LCA, Duarte S, Araujo CA, Abrahão A. Effect of low-elastic modulus liner and base as stress-absorbing layer in composite resin restorations. Dent Mater. 2010;26:e159-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2009.11.076.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Haak R, Wicht MJ, Noack MJ. Marginal and internal adaptation of extended class I restorations lined with flowable composites. J Dent. 2003;31:231–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Menees TS, Lin CP, Kojic DD, Burgess JO, Lawson NC. Depth of cure of bulk fill composites with monowave and polywave curing lights. Am J Dent. 2015;28:357–61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Vaidyanathan J, Vaidyanathan TK. Flexural creep deformation and recovery in dental composites. J Dent. 2001;29:545–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Braga RR, Ferracane JL. Contraction stress related to degree of conversion and reaction kinetics. J Dent Res. 2002;81:114–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Garcia D, Yaman P, Dennison J, Neiva G. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of bulk fill flowable composite resins. Oper Dent. 2014;39:441–8. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-484-L.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jang J-H, Park S-H, Hwang I-N. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of bulk-fill resin composites and highly filled flowable resin. Oper Dent. 2015;40:172–80. https://doi.org/10.2341/13-307-L.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kwon Y, Ferracane J, Lee I-B. Effect of layering methods, composite type, and flowable liner on the polymerization shrinkage stress of light cured composites. Dent Mater. 2012;28:801–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2012.04.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ilie N, Kessler A, Durner J. Influence of various irradiation processes on the mechanical properties and polymerisation kinetics of bulk-fill resin based composites. J Dent. 2013;41:695–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Furness A, Tadros MY, Looney SW, Rueggeberg FA. Effect of bulk/incremental fill on internal gap formation of bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2014;42:439–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.01.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Heintze SD. Systematic reviews: I. The correlation between laboratory tests on marginal quality and bond strength. II. The correlation between marginal quality and clinical outcome. J Adhes Dent. 2007;9(Suppl 1):77–106.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Park K-J, Schneider H, Haak R. Assessment of interfacial defects at composite restorations by swept source optical coherence tomography. J Biomed Opt. 2013;18:76018. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.18.7.076018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Park K-J, Schneider H, Haak R. Assessment of defects at tooth/self-adhering flowable composite interface using swept-source optical coherence tomography (SS-OCT). Dent Mater. 2015;31:534–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2015.02.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Haak R, Schmidt P, Park K-J, Häfer M, Krause F, Ziebolz D, Schneider H. OCT for early quality evaluation of tooth-composite bond in clinical trials. J Dent. 2018;76:46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2018.06.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Häfer M, Schneider H, Rupf S, Busch I, Fuchß A, Merte I, Jentsch H, Haak R, Merte K. Experimental and clinical evaluation of a self-etching and an etch-and-rinse adhesive system. J Adhes Dent. 2013;15:275–86. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a29633.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim HJ, Park SH. Measurement of the internal adaptation of resin composites using micro-CT and its correlation with polymerization shrinkage. Oper Dent. 2014;39:70. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-378-L.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Braga RR, Ballester RY, Ferracane JL. Factors involved in the development of polymerization shrinkage stress in resin-composites: a systematic review. Dent Mater. 2005;21:962–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2005.04.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tarle Z, Attin T, Marovic D, Andermatt L, Ristic M, Taubock TT. Influence of irradiation time on subsurface degree of conversion and microhardness of high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites. Clin Oral Investig. 2015;19:831–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-014-1302-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Magne P, Malta DAMP, Enciso R, Monteiro-Junior S. Heat treatment influences monomer conversion and bond strength of indirect composite resin restorations. J Adhes Dent. 2015;17:559–66. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a35258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim RJ, Kim YJ, Choi NS, Lee IB. Polymerization shrinkage, modulus, and shrinkage stress related to tooth-restoration interfacial debonding in bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2015;43:430–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2015.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zorzin J, Maier E, Harre S, Fey T, Belli R, Lohbauer U, Petschelt A, Taschner M. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization properties and extended light curing. Dent Mater. 2015;31:293–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.12.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Al-Harbi F, Kaisarly D, Bader D, El GM. Marginal integrity of bulk versus incremental fill class II composite restorations. Oper Dent. 2015. https://doi.org/10.2341/14-306-L.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Leprince JG, Palin WM, Vanacker J, Sabbagh J, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physico-mechanical characteristics of commercially available bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2014;42:993–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.05.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ilie N, Bucuta S, Draenert M. Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance. Oper Dent. 2013;38:618–25. https://doi.org/10.2341/12-395-L.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Frankenberger R, Tay FR. Self-etch vs etch-and-rinse adhesives: effect of thermo-mechanical fatigue loading on marginal quality of bonded resin composite restorations. Dent Mater. 2005;21:397–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.07.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Häfer M, Jentsch H, Haak R, Schneider H. A three-year clinical evaluation of a one-step self-etch and a two-step etch-and-rinse adhesive in non-carious cervical lesions. J Dent. 2015;43:350–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.12.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Peumans M, Munck J de, Mine A, van Meerbeek B. Clinical effectiveness of contemporary adhesives for the restoration of non-carious cervical lesions. A systematic review. Dent Mater. 2014;30:1089–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. van Meerbeek B, Yoshihara K, Yoshida Y, Mine A, Munck J de, van Landuyt KL. State of the art of self-etch adhesives. Dent Mater. 2011;27:17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Inoue S, Koshiro K, Yoshida Y, Munck J de, Nagakane K, Suzuki K, Sano H, van Meerbeek B. Hydrolytic stability of self-etch adhesives bonded to dentin. J Dent Res. 2005;84:1160–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/154405910508401213.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Munck J de, Mine A, Poitevin A, van Ende A, Cardoso MV, van Landuyt KL, Peumans M, van Meerbeek B. Meta-analytical review of parameters involved in dentin bonding. J Dent Res. 2012;91:351–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034511431251.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Roggendorf MJ, Kramer N, Appelt A, Naumann M, Frankenberger R. Marginal quality of flowable 4-mm base vs. conventionally layered resin composite. J Dent. 2011;39:643–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2011.07.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Heintze SD, Monreal D, Peschke A. Marginal quality of class II composite restorations placed in bulk compared to an incremental technique: evaluation with SEM and stereomicroscope. J Adhes Dent. 2015;17:147–54. https://doi.org/10.3290/j.jad.a33973.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Breschi L, Mazzoni A, Ruggeri A, Cadenaro M, Di Lenarda R, De Stefano Dorigo E. Dental adhesion review: aging and stability of the bonded interface. Dent Mater. 2008;24:90–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.02.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Shirai K, Munck J de, Yoshida Y, Inoue S, Lambrechts P, Suzuki K, Shintani H, van Meerbeek B. Effect of cavity configuration and aging on the bonding effectiveness of six adhesives to dentin. Dent Mater. 2005;21:110–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2004.01.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hashimoto M, Ohno H, Kaga M, Endo K, Sano H, Oguchi H. In vivo degradation of resin-dentin bonds in humans over 1 to 3 years. J Dent Res. 2000;79:1385–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345000790060601.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Campos EA, Ardu S, Lefever D, Jasse FF, Bortolotto T, Krejci I. Marginal adaptation of class II cavities restored with bulk-fill composites. J Dent. 2014;42:575–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2014.02.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bayraktar Y, Ercan E, Hamidi MM, Colak H. One-year clinical evaluation of different types of bulk-fill composites. J Investig Clin Dent. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1111/jicd.12210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Shahidi C, Krejci I, Dietschi D. In vitro evaluation of marginal adaptation of direct class II composite restorations made of different “low-shrinkage”. Syst Oper Dent. 2017;42:273–83. https://doi.org/10.2341/15-217-L.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Garcia-Godoy F, Krämer N, Feilzer AJ, Frankenberger R. Long-term degradation of enamel and dentin bonds: 6-year results in vitro vs. in vivo. Dent Mater. 2010;26:1113–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2010.07.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Flury S, Peutzfeldt A, Lussi A. Influence of increment thickness on microhardness and dentin bond strength of bulk fill resin composites. Dent Mater. 2014;30:1104–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2014.07.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The intact, non-carious, unrestored human molars were selected out of a pool of collected teeth in accordance with an approved protocol of the Ethics Committee of the University Leipzig, Germany (no. 299-10-04102010).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Rainer Haak and Thomas Näke have contributed equally to this study.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cariology, Endodontology and Periodontology, University of Leipzig, Liebigstr.12, 04103, Leipzig, Germany

    Rainer Haak, Thomas Näke, Kyung-Jin Park, Dirk Ziebolz, Felix Krause & Hartmut Schneider

Authors
  1. Rainer Haak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Näke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kyung-Jin Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dirk Ziebolz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Felix Krause
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hartmut Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rainer Haak.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

 The restoration materials were provided by Dentsply Sirona GmbH, Ivoclar Vivadent AG and Voco GmbH.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was revised: In the original publication of the article the paragraph “The four resin-based composites…” appearing below the “Materials and methods” section is incomplete. The correct paragraph is provided in this correction below: The four resin-based composites were applied to the prepared cavities combined with each of the two adhesives (etch-and-rinse, ER; self-etch, SE). Table 1 shows the properties and composition of the materials used and supplementary table 1 summarizes the procedure of application.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 69 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Haak, R., Näke, T., Park, KJ. et al. Internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites in class II cavities placed with different adhesive strategies. Odontology 107, 374–382 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0402-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-018-0402-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation