The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 19 , ISSUE 1 ( January, 2018 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Diametral Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength, and Surface Microhardness of Bioactive Bulk Fill Restorative

Ali Alrahlah

Citation Information : Alrahlah A. Diametral Tensile Strength, Flexural Strength, and Surface Microhardness of Bioactive Bulk Fill Restorative. J Contemp Dent Pract 2018; 19 (1):13-19.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2205

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-01-2018


Abstract

Aim: The aim was to perform comparative analysis of bioactive, contemporary bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) and conventional glass-ionomer materials for flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and Vickers hardness number (VHN) in the presence of thermocycling. Materials and methods: Five restorative materials [Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill; smart dentin replacement (SDR) Flowable Material; Bioactive restorative material (ACTIVA Bulk Fill); Ketac Universal Aplicap; and GC Fuji II] were evaluated for DTS, FS, and VHN. Half the samples in each material group were thermocycled. The DTS was performed under compressive load at a cross-head speed of 1.0 mm/min. The FS was assessed by three-point bending test at a cross-head speed of 0.5 mm/min. The VHN was determined using a Vickers diamond indenter at 50 gf load for 15 seconds. Differences in FS, DTS, and VHN were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc tests at α = 0.05 level of significance. Results: N-Ceram, ACTIVA, and SDR demonstrated the highest and comparable (p > 0.05) FS. The SDR had the highest DTS value (141.28 ± 0.94), followed by N-Ceram (136.61 ± 1.56) and ACTIVA (129.05 ± 1.78). Ketac had the highest VHN value before and after thermocycling. Conclusion: ACTIVA showed mechanical properties (FS and DTS) comparable with bulk-fill resin composite materials. ACTIVA showed potential for durability, as VHN was comparable post-thermocycling. Clinical significance: Bioactive materials showed acceptable DTS and FS values. However, hardness was compromised compared with included materials. ACTIVA Bulk Fill shows potential for dentin replacement but it needs to be covered with a surface-resistant restorative material. Further studies to improve surface characteristics of ACTIVA Bulk Fill are recommended.


PDF Share
  1. Pallesen U, van Dijken JW. A randomized controlled 30 years follow up of three conventional resin composites in class II restorations. Dent Mater 2015 Oct;31(10):1232-1244
  2. New insight into the “depth of cure” of dimethacrylatebased dental composites. Dent Mater 2012 May;28(5):512-520
  3. Monomers used in resin composites: degree of conversion, mechanical properties and water sorption/solubility. Braz Dent J 2012 Sep-Oct;23(5):508-514
  4. Bulk-fill resinbased composite restorative materials: a review. Br Dent J 2017 Mar;222(5):337-344
  5. Curing profile of bulk-fill resin-based composites. J Dent 2015 Jun;43(6):664-672
  6. Micro-hardness of in vitro caries inhibition zone adjacent to conventional and resin-modified glass-ionomer cements. Dent Mater 1998 Jun;14(3):179-185
  7. Comparative mechanical properties of bulk-fill resins. Open J Compos Mater 2014 Apr;4(2):117-121
  8. The reliability in flexural strength testing of a novel dental composite. J Dent 2003 Nov;31(8):549-557
  9. Bioactive and biomimetic restorative materials: a comprehensive review. Part II. J Esthet Restor Dent 2014 Jan-Feb;26(1):27-39
  10. Dental adhesives with bioactive and on-demand bactericidal properties. Dent Mater 2010 May;26(5):491-499
  11. Effect of coupling agents on the local mechanical properties of bioactive dental composites by the nano-indentation technique. Dent Mater 2005 Jul;21(7):656-664
  12. A review of glass-ionomers: from conventional glass-ionomer to bioactive glass-ionomer. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2013 Jul-Aug;10(4):411-420
  13. Host-mineral trioxide aggregate inflammatory molecular signaling and biomineralization ability. J Endod 2010 Aug;36(8):1347-1353
  14. The impact of bioactive molecules to stimulate tooth repair and regeneration as part of restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am 2006 Apr;50(2):277-298
  15. A new bioactive polylactide-based composite with high mechanical strength. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 2014 Sep;457:256-262
  16. Influence of thermal cycles in water on flexural strength of laboratoryprocessed composite resin. J Oral Rehabil 2001 Aug;28(8): 703-707
  17. Physical properties of different composites. Dent Mater J 2004 Sep;23(3):278-283
  18. ISO 4049 Polymer Based Filling. Restorative and luting materials. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2000. p. 1-27
  19. Flexural strength and flexural fatigue properties of resinmodified glass ionomers. J Clin Dent 2015;26(1):23-27
  20. Network structure of Bis-GMA-and UDMA-based resin systems. Dent Mater 2006 Dec;22(12): 1143-1149
  21. Influence of chain extender length of aromatic dimethacrylates on polymer network development. Dent Mater 2008 Feb;24(2):165-171
  22. Influence of UEDMA, BisGMA and TEGDMA on selected mechanical properties of experimental resin composites. Dent Mater 1998 Jan;14(1):51-56
  23. Characterization of dimethacrylate polymeric networks: a study of the crosslinked structure formed by monomers used in dental composites. Eur Polym J 2011 Feb;47(2):162-170
  24. The effect of storage media upon the surface micro-hardness and abrasion resistance of three composites. Dent Mater 1990 Apr;6(2):123-128
  25. Aging studies of light cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins and a resin composite in water or ethanol/water. Dent Mater 2007 Sep;23(9):1142-1149
  26. Flexural behaviour of post-cured composites at oral-simulating temperatures. J Oral Rehab 2001 Jul;28(7): 658-667.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.