The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 12 ( December, 2017 ) > List of Articles


Clinical Time Required and Internal Adaptation in Cavities restored with Bulk-fill Composites

Guilherme Ferreira Rego, Luis Felipe Jochims Schneider, Marcos Gabriel Vianna-de-Pinho, Marina Lermenn Vidal, Roberta Caroline Bruschi Alonso, Larissa Maria Cavalcante

Citation Information : Rego GF, Schneider LF, Vianna-de-Pinho MG, Vidal ML, Alonso RC, Cavalcante LM. Clinical Time Required and Internal Adaptation in Cavities restored with Bulk-fill Composites. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (12):1107-1111.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2184

Published Online: 01-03-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; The Author(s).



The aim of this study was to compare the restorative time required and the internal adaptation after thermomechanical aging of class I restorations using either the conventional incremental technique or bulk-fill technique.

Materials and methods

Cavities (Class I) were prepared on the occlusal surface of human third molars. 40 teeth were divided into four experimental groups according to the restorative technique (n = 10): G1 = 3 mm increment of Surefill SDR Flow + 1 mm Filtek P60; G2 = 3 mm increment of Filtek Bulk-Fill + 1 mm Filtek P60; G3 = Filtek P60 inserted with incremental technique; G4 = 3 mm increment of Filtek Z350 Flow XT + 1 mm increment of Filtek P60. The required restorative clinical time for each technique was marked. Specimens were submitted to thermomechanical loading (20,000 mechanical cycles—80 N/thermal cycling—5/55°C for 30 seconds). After, samples were sectioned, ratio of internal gaps to interface length (%) was recorded using dye-staining-gap technique. Data were submitted to analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (95% significance).


There was no significant difference in gap formation and none of the groups was completely gap-free. However, a significant reduction on required restorative clinical time was observed for G1 (167 ± 7 seconds), G2 (169 ± 4 seconds), and G4 (169 ± 8 seconds) when compared with G3 (204 ± 8 seconds).


No significant difference in gap formation was found among bulk-fill and conventional incremental restorative technique tested; however, the use of a bulk-fill composite reduced 20% of the required restorative clinical time.

Clinical significance

None of the restorative techniques applied were able to prevent internal gap formation. The use of bulk-fill composite reduced the required clinical time to perform class I restorations.

How to cite this article

Vianna-de-Pinho MG, Rego GF, Vidal ML, Alonso RCB, Schneider LFJ, Cavalcante LM. Clinical Time Required and Internal Adaptation in Cavities restored with Bulkfill Composites. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(12):1107-1111.

PDF Share
  1. Mechanical properties and wear behavior of light-cured packable composite resins. Dent Mater 2000 Jan;16(1):33-40.
  2. Abrasive wear of resin composites as related to finishing and polishing procedures. Dent Mater 2005 Jul;21(7):641-648.
  3. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J Am Dent Assoc 1998 May;129(5):567-577.
  4. Bulk-filling of high C-factor posterior cavities: Effect on adhesion to cavity-bottom dentin. Dent Mater 2013 Mar;29(3):269-277.
  5. 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 Oct;142(10):1176-1182.
  6. The influence of irradiation potential on the degree of conversion and mechanical properties of two bulk-fill flowable RBC base materials. Dent Mater 2013 Aug;29(8):906-912.
  7. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology. Dent Mater 2011 Apr;27(4):348-355.
  8. Marginal quality of flowable 4-mm base vs. conventionally layered resin composite. J Dent 2011 Oct;39(10):643-647.
  9. In vitro comparison of mechanical properties and degree of cure of bulk fill composites. Clin Oral Investig 2013 Jan;17(1):227-235.
  10. Sealing ability of eight resin bonding systems in a Class II restoration after mechanical fatiguing. Dent Mater 1997 Nov;13(6):372-376.
  11. Influence of load cycling on marginal microleakage with two self-etching and two one-bottle dentin adhesive systems in dentin. J Adhes Dent 2003 Fall;5(3):209-216.
  12. Effect of thermal and mechanical load cycling on microtensile bond strength of a total-etch adhesive system. Oper Dent 2004 Apr;29(2):150-156.
  13. Effect of thermal and mechanical load cycling on nanolea-kage of Class II restorations. J Adhes Dent 2004 Autumn;6(3):221-226.
  14. Effect of mechanical loading on microleakage of resin composite restorations lined with low modulus materials. Oral Sci 2005 May;1:23-28.
  15. Thermo-mechanical degradation of composite restoration photoactivated by modulated methods—a SEM study of marginal and internal gap formation. Acta Odontol Scand 2013 Feb;71(5):1341-1347.
  16. Dye staining gap test: an alternative method for assessing marginal gap formation in composite restorations—validating the method. Acta Odontol Scand 2013 Sep;71(5):1341-1347.
  17. Hardness, polymerization depth, and internal adaptation of Class II silorane composite restorations as a function of polymerization protocol. Eur J Dent 2012 Apr;6(2):133-140.
  18. Do low-shrink composites reduce polymerization shrinkage effects? J Dent Res 2011 May;90(5):596-601.
  19. Dentsply Caulk. 2009. [cited 2017 Jun 01]. Available from:
  20. Comparative properties of low-shrinkage composite resins. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2010 May;31(Spec No 2):10-15.
  21. Cuspal deflection and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with bulk-fill flowable resin-based composite base materials. J Dent 2012 Jun;40(6):500-505.
  22. Bulk fill restoratives: to cap or not to cap—that is the question? J Dent 2015 Mar;43(3):309-316.
  23. Evaluation of cervical marginal and internal adaptation using newer bulk fill composites: an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2015 Jan-Feb;18(1):56-61.
  24. Monomer conversion, microhardness, internal marginal adaptation, and shrinkage stress of bulk-fill resin composites. Dent Mater 2015 Dec;31(12):1542-1551.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.