The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Various Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro Study

Fahad I Alkhudhairy, Zeeshan H Ahmad

Citation Information : Alkhudhairy FI, Ahmad ZH. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Various Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (12):997-1002.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1970

Published Online: 01-12-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Introduction

Various bulk-fill materials depending on their composition, viscosity, and flow ability have different physical and mechanical properties. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine and compare the shear bond strength and microleakage properties of activa restorative with other bulk-fill restorative materials surefil (SDR), Biodentine, ever X posterior.

Materials and methods

Forty permanent premolars were selected for shear bond strength, and 20 permanent premolars were selected with class II cavities on mesial and distal side for microleakage. Universal testing device was used to assess the shear bond strength. Microleakage was checked using dye penetration method under a stereomicroscope. Mean and standard deviation values were calculated from the recorded values. Intergroup comparison was done by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by pairwise comparison using Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) post hoc test.

Results

The mean shear bond strength was highest for SDR surefil followed by Ever X posterior, Bioactive restorative, and Biodentine respectively. In this study, SDR (surefil) showed better shear bond strength and better microleakage properties compared with the other test materials (F = 186.7157, p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The result of this study showed that flowable and fiber-reinforced composites have better shear bond strength and microleakage properties.

Clinical significance

Flowable bulk-fill composite resins can be used as dentin substitutes because of its superior properties.

How to cite this article

Alkhudhairy FI, Ahmad ZH. Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage of Various Bulk-fill Bioactive Dentin substitutes: An in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(12):997-1002.


PDF Share
  1. Comparative evaluation of shear bond strength and microleakage of tricalcium silicate-based restorative material and radioopaque posterior glass ionomer restorative cement in primary and permanent teeth: an in vitro study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2014 Oct-Dec;32(4):304-310.
  2. Recent advances and developments in composite dental restorative materials. J Dent Res 2011 Apr;90(4):402-416.
  3. Longevity of posterior composite restorations: not only a matter of materials. Dent Mater 2012 Jan;28(1):87-101.
  4. Bulk-fill flowable composite resins. J Esthet Restor Dent 2013 Feb;25(1):72-76.
  5. Physical properties and depth of cure of a new short fiber reinforced composite. Dent Mater 2013 Aug;29(8):835-841.
  6. Induction of specific cell responses to a Ca 3 SiO 5-based posterior restorative material. Dent Mater 2008 Nov;24(11):1486-1494.
  7. PULPDENT® publication. Watertown, MA: Pulpdent Corporation; 2014.
  8. Comparative evaluation of tensile bond strength and microleakage of conventional glass ionomer cement, resin modified glass ionomer cement and compomer: an in vitro study. Contemp Clin Dent 2012 Jul;3(3):282.
  9. Microleakage testing. Ann Dent 1997;4(1):1-54.
  10. Comparative evaluation of the microleakage of two modified glass ionomer cements on primary molars. An in vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2011 Apr;29(2):135.
  11. Nano-ionomer restorative cement. Inside Dent 2009;5(1):60-67.
  12. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996 Mar;75(3):871-878.
  13. A randomized controlled three year evaluation of “bulk-filled” posterior resin restorations based on stress decreasing resin technology. Dent Mater 2014 Sep;30(9):e245-e251.
  14. Hardness comparison of bulk-filled/transtooth and incremental-filled/occlusally irradiated composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 2007 Aug;98(2):129-140.
  15. Bulk-filling of high C-factor posterior cavities: effect on adhesion to cavity-bottom dentin. Dent Mater 2013 Mar;29(3):269-277.
  16. How should composite be layered to reduce shrinkage stress: incremental or bulk filling? Dent Mater 2008 Nov;24(11):1501-1505.
  17. Influence of placement techniques on Vickers and Knoop hardness of class II composite resin restorations. Dent Mater 2004 Oct 31;20(8):726-732.
  18. Direct restoration of severely damaged incisors using short fiber-reinforced composite resin. J Dent 2007 Sep;35(9):731-736.
  19. Fiber-reinforced packable resin composites in class II cavities. J Dent 2006 Nov;34(10):763-769.
  20. Effect of fibre conditioning on the interfacial shear strength of glass-fibre composites. Composit Sci Technol 1993 Dec;48(1):89-96.
  21. gceurope.com/products/detail.php?id=162 [cited 2016 Jul 8].
  22. Evaluation of a novel composite restorative system for posterior teeth: microleakage, bond strength, and gap formation on Class II MOD cavities. Data on File. 2009. Available from: http://www.surefilsdrflow.com .23.
  23. Dentin substitutes: a review. Int J Pharm Bio Sci 2015 July;6(3):383-391.
  24. Comparative evaluation of push-out bond strength of ProRoot MTA, Biodentine, and MTA Plus in furcation perforation repair. J Conserv Dent 2013 Sep;16(5):462-465.
  25. Microleakage: a review. J Dent 1976 Sep;4(5):199-206.
  26. 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 Jan;9 (Suppl) 1:77.
  27. Directly placed esthetic restorative materials – the continuum. Compend Contin Educ Dent 1996 Aug;17(8):731-732.
  28. The continuum of restorative materials in pediatric dentistry-a review for the clinician. Pediatr Dent 1998 Mar;20(2):93-100.
  29. Dental repair material: a resinmodified glass-ionomer bioactive ionic resin-based composite. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2015 Jan;36(1):60-65.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.