Does vibration improve cavity adaptation of composite resin?

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1987973/v1

Download PDF

Article

Does vibration improve cavity adaptation of composite resin?

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1987973/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

You are reading this latest preprint version

This study evaluates the effect of vibration on adaptation of bulk-fill composite resin. A scanning laser doppler vibrometer measured the frequency and amplitude of a vibratory device (COMO) used for resin placement and visualized its effect on the resin according to depth. FB was placed in simulated cavities (4 mm diameter, 4 mm depth) by different layering methods (incremental filling with two 2-mm-thick layers vs. bulk filling with a single 4-mm-thick layer). The groups were further divided based on the application of vibration during restoration (no vibration vs. vibration). The voids that formed at the bottom surface of the cavity and the bottom, middle, top third, and overall void volumes were measured using micro-computed tomography. The frequency and amplitude of the COMO were approximately 149 Hz and between 26 and 51 um, respectively. Vibration provided improved surface adaptation and lower void volumes during incremental filling (p < 0.05). Vibration applied with a 4-mm-thick bulk fill had no effect on the adaptation of composite resin (p > 0.05). Void volume was markedly higher in the bottom part in all groups. Application of vibration to the resin with a 2-mm incremental-layering technique produced the best adaptation of the composite resin.

Bulk-filling

Incremental filling

Microcomputed tomography

Vibration

Void

Composite resins are the most widely used direct restorative dental materials because of their aesthetics and ability to adhere to teeth with proper bonding materials. However, composite resins inevitably shrink by 2–4% during polymerization¹, which can cause stress-induced debonding at the tooth-restoration interface when shrinkage stress exceeds bond strength². Incremental filling, in which each layer of a 2-mm-thick composite is light-cured, is recommended to minimize potentially detrimental polymerization shrinkage stress^3,4. In addition, incremental filling ensures a high degree of conversion without jeopardizing the mechanical properties of the composite resin as light-curing irradiance diminishes with increasing resin thickness^5,6.

Bulk-fill composite resins have been introduced to simplify dental procedures and save chair time compared with incremental techniques that use conventional composite resins⁷. According to the manufacturers of bulk-fill resins, bulk-fill composites have modified monomers that help reduce polymerization shrinkage stress, while a lower filler amount or greater filler size facilitates light transmission due to reduction of light scattering at the filler-matrix interface^8,9. These modified properties of bulk-fill composites ensure fillings 4–5 mm thick in bulk. Nevertheless, any type of composite resin can entrap voids, creating gaps between the resin and the tooth structure during placement⁷. Voids can be more readily entrapped when a large volume of resin is packed in a confined cavity. Gap formation between the tooth and resin is associated with clinical complications such as microleakage, discoloration¹⁰, impaired mechanical strength¹¹, and bond strength¹².

Hand-held vibratory devices have been developed to facilitate composite resin adaptation and handling. Vibration reportedly reduces the viscosity of the resin, allowing intimate adaptation of the composite to the cavity¹³. Packable materials with greater viscosity can be used in a manner similar to that of flowable resin, without the drawbacks of high polymerization shrinkage and poor mechanical properties¹⁴. Most studies of the application of vibration during restoration have used the SonicFill system (Kerr Corp., Orange, CA, USA), which is a sonically activated handpiece that delivers a packable composite resin with a low viscosity. However, it is difficult to apply these results to different bulk-fill resins because the SonicFill system uses a special type of compule to ensure compatibility. Another option for applying vibration in composite resin restoration is the use of a vibratory resin applicator, but little relevant research has been reported. No studies have evaluated the adaptation of composite resin to the cavity during incremental or bulk filling with or without vibration. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of vibration (no vibration vs. vibration) and resin-filling techniques at different resin thicknesses (incremental filling vs. bulk filling) on cavity adaptation by measuring void formation at various sites within the cavity. The null hypotheses were that void formation would not differ between conventional placement without vibration and modified placement with vibration, and that neither incremental filling nor bulk filling would affect void formation.

2.1. Rheological measurement of composite resin

A nano-hybrid bulk-fill composite resin (Fitek Bulk Fill [FB] Posterior Restorative, lot No. 4864A3; 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) was used in this study as restorative material. The inorganic filler loading of the composite resin accounted for 76.5% of the resin by weight and 58.4% by volume. A dynamic frequency sweep test was performed to determine the viscoelastic change of the composite resin under oscillating shear using a rotational rheometer (ARES-G2; TA instrument, New Castle, DE, USA) equipped with 8 mm parallel plates set to a distance of 2 mm. The storage modulus G′, loss modulus G″, and complex viscosity η^* were measured at 30℃ and at frequencies from 0.1–100 Hz. The measurements were performed at a shear strain of 2%, which is close to the limit of linear viscoelastic resin and similar to the amplitude of vibration device and specimen thickness (0.05 mm and 2 mm)¹⁵.

2.2. Vibration measurement with a scanning laser doppler vibrometer

A vibration-generating resin applicator (COMO; B&L Biotech, Ansan, Korea) was used to transmit vibration energy on composite resin. The device is a battery-operated motor-driven vibrator specifically designed for manipulation of dental resin. A rounded-end tip 2 mm in diameter was used among various changeable tips. A scanning laser doppler vibrometer (SLDV) (Optomet GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany) was used to measure the vibration of the device. The SLDV uses a short-wavelength infrared laser, and the Doppler shift of the reflected laser beam is used to measure vibration velocity¹⁶. After fixing the device in place with a rounded-end tip (2 mm diameter), the SLDV beam was focused on the vibrating tip to measure the frequency and amplitude of oscillation, both perpendicularly and horizontally (Fig. 1A). Each scan lasted approximately 10 s, with an interval of 20 s between scans. Five repeat vibrometer scans were performed.

2.3 Resin vibration measurement using a scanning laser doppler vibrometer

A block with a cavity (5 mm wide, 4 mm high, and 4 mm deep) was fabricated using a 3D printer (IMC; Carima, Seoul, Korea). Two sides of the cavity were opened to allow access for the SLDV beam and the vibration device. A mesh of 12 measurement points, arranged in a grid with 1 mm between points, from the open surface was placed on the resin-filled surface using the SLDV (Fig. 1B). The vibrator tip was provided with vibration energy on the surface of the open side of the filled resin. The vibration of the entire grid on the composite resin surface was scanned and the vibration velocities were recorded (n = 5). The averaged values of the three measuring points at each depth were compared to understand the general trend of vibration effect according to resin depth. Dedicated SLDV software (OptoSCAN) displayed the vibration pattern in a colour map.

2.4. Adaptation evaluation using micro-CT

2.4.1. Specimen preparation

Standardized cylindrical class 1 cavities (4 mm diameter, 4 mm depth) were milled on resin-based hybrid ceramic using a CAD/CAM block (Mazic Duro; Vericom, Anyang, Korea) and a computerized numerical control milling machine (A-PRO MILL; Namsun, Daejeon, Korea). The milled cylindrical cavities were digitized using a 3D scanner (T500, Medit, Seoul, Korea) and saved as STL files. The STL data of the cavities were superimposed on each other using metrology software (PointShape Inspector 2.16; DREAMTNS, Seongnam, Korea). The deviation of each cavity was within ± 20 µm, verifying the dimensional accuracy of the milled cavities (Fig. 1C).

2.4.2. Restorative procedure

The cavities were roughened with 50 µm aluminium oxide (blasting medium; Dentaurum GmbH & Co. KG, Ispringen, Germany), cleaned with copious water and air-dried, followed by application of a silane coupling agent (Porcelain Primer; Bisco Inc., Schaumburg, IL, USA). A bonding agent (Single Bond Universal; 3M ESPE) was applied to each cavity and light-cured for 10 s (Elipar DeepCure-S; 3M ESPE) after adequate air drying until no visible movement of the bonding agent was observed. Filtek Bulk Fill (3M ESPE) was placed into the cavities using a delivery gun. The tip of the resin compule was initially placed in contact with the cavity floor, and the resin was delivered slowly while the gun was moved away from the cavity floor to minimize entrapment of air in the resin. Resin filling was performed with two different layering techniques (incremental filling with two 2-mm-thick layers and bulk-filling with a single 4-mm-thick layer). Each layer was packed for 10 s with two strokes per second using a 2-mm-diameter tip on a vibratory device specifically designed for resin application (COMO; B&L Biotech, Ansan, Korea) with or without vibration (no vibration vs. vibration) (n = 10) (Fig. 1D). Light-curing was performed for 20 s after placement of each layer.

2.4.3. Evaluation of surface adaptation and void volume using micro-CT

Each sample was scanned using high-resolution micro-CT (Model 1273, SkyScan, Aartselaar, Belgium). Exposure parameters were set at a tube voltage of 120 kVp, a current of 125 µA, a voxel size of 9.88 µm, a 0.4° rotation step, and an average of three frames with an exposure time of 42 min. Aluminium and copper filters were used to suppress beam-hardening artifacts. The 2D projection images were transformed into 3D volumes using a reconstruction program (NRecon, ver. 1.7.5.1, SkyScan).

A two-dimensional CT image of the cavity floor was selected and the percentage of the entire floor surface area occupied by void surface area was calculated to evaluate the surface adaptation at the cavity floor using analysis software (CTAn, ver 1.18.9.0, Skyscan).

The total void volume (void volume per total cavity volume, %) and void volume of three separate parts (bottom, middle, and top) were evaluated using CTAn. The bottom part of the specimen was defined as the cavity floor to a height of 1.3 mm, the middle part as 1.3 mm to 2.6 mm, and the top part as 2.6 mm to 3.9 mm (Fig. 1D). The void volume of each part and the total void volume were compared according to vibration device and incremental technique. The 3D void distribution was visualized using rendering software (CTVox, ver. 3.3.0, SkyScan).

2.4.4. Statistical analysis

Levene’s test was used to assess the equality of variances and the Shapiro–Wilk test was used to verify the normality of each variable. The median values of the resin vibration measured by the SLDV and the median values of the 2D void surface and 3D void volume (%) were analysed using the Kruskal–Wallis test, followed by a post hoc Mann–Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons. The void volume between incremental techniques was compared using Mann–Whitney U tests. All tests were conducted at a level of significance of 0.05. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics, v25 (IBM Corp., Armonk. NY, USA).

3.1. Rheological measurements

Both the storage modulus G′ and loss modulus G″ increased with frequency. The Filtek Bulk Fill resin showed pseudoplasticity; the complex viscosity η^* of the composite resin decreased with increasing frequency, from 32,918 Pa·s at 1 Hz to 1,936 Pa·s at 100 Hz (Table 1 and Fig. 2).

Table 1

Changes in storage modulus, loss modulus, and complex viscosity as a function of frequency µm
Frequency (Hz)	Storage modulus (Pa)	Loss modulus (Pa)	Complex viscosity (Pa·s)
0.1	168,920	147,987	357,423
1	131,278	159,829	32,918
10	170,599	365,105	6,414
100	361,987	1,161,610	1,936

3.2. Evaluation of device frequency and amplitude

The vertical and horizontal frequencies of COMO were 149 Hz, while the vertical and horizontal amplitudes of COMO were 50.5 µm and 26.4 µm (Fig. 3).

3.3. Evaluation of resin vibration using SLDV

The velocity of vibration decreased as the depth of the resin increased. The vibration effect, as indicated by velocity of vibration, was significantly reduced as the depth of the resin increased (p < 0.001) (Table 2). Figure 4 provides a representative colour map of composite resin vibrations scanned by SLDV. Vibration energy was able to propagate to a resin depth of approximately 2 mm, and little vibration remained at 4 mm

Table 2

Resin vibration at various distances from the resin applicator tip
Distance from tip	1 mm	2 mm	3 mm	4 mm	χ²
Vibration velocity (mm/s)	1804 A (1325–1937)	974 B (766–313)	462 C (322–769)	68 D (43–172)	48.75	< 0.001
χ2, chi-square; p, p-value.
Interquartile ranges (first quartile, third quartile) are in parentheses.
Different uppercase letters indicate statistically significant difference (row) in the Kruskal–Wallis and multiple comparisons by Mann–Whitney U test, p < 0.05).

3.3. Micro-CT analysis

3.3.1. Evaluation of surface adaptation at the cavity floor

Table 3 presents the medians and standard deviations of surface adaptation (surface area % at the pulpal floor). Vibration was associated with a significantly smaller void surface area in the incremental filling (p = 0.035), while no difference was observed in the bulk filling (p = 0.631). The differences between incremental filling and bulk filling were not statistically significant with vibration (p = 0.131) and without vibration (p = 0.762). Two-dimensional micro-CT images revealed that voids formed most frequently around the corner of the cavity floor, with a marked decrease of void tendency in incremental filling with vibration (Fig. 5A).

Table 3

Surface adaptation (void area %) at the cavity floor
	No vibration	Vibration	U	p
Incremental filling	15.38 (14.03–21.17)	8.72 * (5.30–15.47)	22	0.035
Bulk filling	17.15 (11.63–23.05)	15.49 (12.43–20.84)	43	0.631
U	46	30
p	0.762	0.131
U-value; p, p-value.
Interquartile ranges (first quartile, third quartile) are in parentheses.
An asterisk indicates significantly higher void volumes within the same filling technique between no vibration and vibration (row) (Mann–Whitney U test, p < 0.05).

3.3.2. Evaluation of 3D void volume

Images rendered in 3D showed smaller overall and internal voids at the bottom surface corner in incremental fillings compared with bulk fillings, particularly when vibration was applied. Some voids were found at the middle of the cavity in some of the incremental fillings (Fig. 5B). A significantly higher void volume (%) was observed in the bottom part both in the incremental and bulk filling groups, regardless of vibration mode (p < 0.001), while no significant differences were found between the middle and top parts (p > 0.05) (Table 4, Fig. 6. When compared with conventional applications, the vibration mode significantly reduced void volume in the bottom part of the incremental filling (p = 0.023) but not in the bottom part of the bulk filling (p = 0.226). The overall void volume was significantly lower only in the incremental filling when the composite was filled using the vibration mode (p = 0.003). Regardless of vibration application, compared with a bulk filling, the void volume in the bottom part was significantly reduced in the incremental filling (p = 0.028 for no vibration and p = 0.005 for vibration) (Table 5).

Table 4

Void volume (%) of incremental fillings and bulk fillings in different cavity parts between no vibration and vibration.
		Cavity part		No vibration		Vibration		U	p
Incremental filling		Bottom		1.85 A (1.57–3.49)		0.74 A * [0.23–1.91)		20	0.023
		Middle		0.23 B (0.04–0.63)		0.01 B [0–0.06)		26	0.070
		Top		0.08 B (0.03–0.35)		0.09 B [0.02–0.15)		43	0.597
		χ²		18.91		15.69
		p		< 0.001		< 0.001
		Overall		1.34 (0.69–1.94)		0.31 * [0.08–0.75)		11	0.003
Bulk filling	Bottom		3.86 A (2.15–5.67)		2.84 A [1.25–4.36)		34			0.226
	Middle		0.46 B (0.08–1.01)		0.28 B [0.18–0.76)		47			0.821
	Top		0.70 B (0.21–1.20)		0.52 B [0.24–1.49)		54			0.762
	χ²		17.61		15.73
	p		< 0.001		< 0.001
	Overall		1.62 (1.08–2.23)		1.59 [0.67–2.07)		40			0.450
χ2, chi-square; U, U-value; p, p-value.
Interquartile ranges (first quartile, third quartile) are in parentheses.
Different uppercase letters indicate statistically significant difference between bottom, middle, and top parts (column) (Kruskal–Wallis and multiple comparisons by Mann–Whitney U tests, p < 0.05).
An asterisk indicates significantly lower void volume within same part between no vibration and vibration (row) (Mann–Whitney U tests, p < 0.05).

Table 5

Void volume (%) in the bottom, middle, top, and overall cavity for incremental and bulk fillings
Cavity part		No vibration	Vibration
Bottom	Incremental filling	1.85 * (1.57–3.49)	0.74 * (0.23–1.91)
	Bulk filling	3.86 (2.71–5.67)	2.84 (1.25–4.36)
	U	80	87
	p	0.028	0.005
Middle	Incremental filling	0.23 (0.04–0.63)	0.01 * (0–0.06)
	Bulk filling	0.46 (0.08–1.01)	0.28 (0.18–0.76)
	U	59	78
	p	0.496	0.034
Top	Incremental filling	0.08 * (0.03–0.35)	0.09 * (0.02–0.15)
	Bulk filling	0.70 (0.21–1.2)	0.52 (0.24–1.49)
	U	85	92
	p	0.008	0.001
Overall	Incremental filling	1.34 (0.69–1.94)	0.31 * (0.08–0.75)
	Bulk filling	1.62 (1.08–2.23)	1.59 (0.67–2.07)
	U	63	86
	p	0.353	0.007
U, U-value; p, p-value.
Interquartile ranges (first quartile, third quartile) are in parentheses.
An asterisk indicates significantly lower void volume within same part between incremental fillings and bulk fillings (column) (Mann–Whitney U test, p < 0.05).

Adaptation of bulk-fill composite resin was analysed by evaluating the void area at the cavity floor and the void volume in the bottom, middle, and top-third of the cavity using a non-destructive technique and micro-CT. The findings of the present study showed that void formation varied depending on layering methods at different resin thicknesses (incremental filling vs. bulk filling) and vibration application (no vibration vs. vibration), rejecting the null hypotheses.

Regardless of vibration application and resin thickness, voids were more frequently observed in the bottom part of the cavities compared with the middle and top parts. These findings were in agreement with those of previous studies^15,17, confirming that the bottom part is most likely to be free of voids. In the present study, vibration resulted in significantly improved surface adaptation at the cavity floor and reduced void volumes, particularly in the bottom part, when composite resin was placed in two 2-mm-thick layers through incremental filling. A correlation between gap formation at the pulpal floor and post-operative sensitivity has long been established¹⁸; using a vibration device combined with incremental layering might help alleviate post-operative sensitivity. As the presence of an internal void within the composite resin reduced the durability and weakened the mechanical properties, possibly leading to fractures and failure of resin restoration¹⁹, the use of a vibration device in composite resin placement appears to be useful for increasing the strength and durability of resin restoration. Han et al. also studied the effect of the device used in the present study on resin adaptation¹⁵. The authors reported a tendency of FB to result in fewer gaps forming with vibration, although the difference was not statistically significant. The difference between the present and previous findings cannot be explained by variability in experimental features, such as number of samples, cavity geometry, design, and resin type (syringe vs. compule type).

Within the bottom part of the cavity, voids were more readily detected at the cavity floor, particularly around the line angle at the junction of the axial wall and cavity floor. This might be associated with cavity geometry; the cavity had a sharp line angle that represents the most challenging situation for intimate adaptation of composite resin to the line angle. In addition to superior distribution of shrinkage stress, rounded internal angles would be also favourable for resin adaptation. Flowable composite resins might allow for superior adaptation to cavity walls due to their lower viscosity²⁰; applying flowable resin as a liner should therefore enhance adaptation and reduce microleakage²¹. Use of a flowable resin as a liner is also effective in reducing cusp deflection due to its low elastic modulus²². One other method of reducing the viscosity of composite resin is preheating before delivery²³. As with vibration, preheating improves handling and increases adaptation, with none of the mechanical disadvantages. Although multiple studies have reported superior adaptation and decreased gap formation with preheated resin composite compared with resin at room temperature^24–26, injecting heated resin into the cavity might not favour pulpal health²⁷.

An SLDV is a non-invasive device for measuring the instantaneous velocity of vibrating objects using the Doppler shift of laser light¹⁶. SLDVs have replaced accelerometers and other surface-contacting sensors in the measurement of vibrating objects due to the non-contacting nature of the instrument. They have been used to measure the vibration patterns of dental devices, including an ultrasonic scaler²⁸, high-speed handpiece²⁹, endosonic file³⁰, and powered tooth brush³¹. In the present study, the frequency and vertical and horizontal amplitudes of the COMO vibratory resin applicator measured by SLDV were approximately 149 Hz and 50.5 µm and 26.4 µm, respectively. For rheology tests, the complex viscosity of the bulk fill decreased significantly as the vibration frequency increased. This phenomenon is known as pseudoplasticity and is a common characteristic of composite resin caused by molecular repositioning and separation under shear stress³². As the frequency exceeded 100 Hz, complex viscosity converged to approximately 2,000 Pa·s, which means that the degree of viscosity reduction due to the vibrator might be similar or slightly lower if the vibration frequency is greater than 100 Hz. Although vibration effectively reduced void formation in the bottom part of the incremental filling, its effect was negligible in bulk filling. The 4-mm-thick resin in the bulk filling was too thick for the vibration energy to be delivered effectively to the resin, as evidenced by the colour map obtained by the SLDV, which showed a gradual reduction of the vibration effect as the distance from the applicator tip increased. The limited vibration effect beyond a depth of 2 mm accounts for the contrasting findings between incremental and bulk filling.

Previous studies of the use of vibration devices for composite resin restoration report conflicting outcomes. Most studies of the effect of vibration on resin restoration employed the SonicFill system. According to the manufacturer, the increased flowability due to vibration is intended to achieve more precise adaptation to cavity walls, but these results are controversial. One study that evaluated microleakage in class II restoration using dye penetration reported that a SonicFill had the lowest microleakage values among tested groups³³. In contrast, studies of gap formation and microleakage reported that a SonicFill system produced no specific differences compared with other bulk-fill resins^7,34 or conventional resins with incremental layering³⁵. A study evaluating the internal adaptation and gap formation using several bulk-fill resins and a conventional resin as a control found that a SonicFill system produced significantly larger gaps and less adaptation to cavities compared with other tested resins³⁶. Other studies reported that the sonic insertion method increased void formation during delivery of resin composites. Given that the SonicFill is a sonically activated resin-delivery system, no additional vibration can be applied to condensed resin after it is placed in the cavity. In contrast, the device used in this study was designed to provide vibration energy with a packing motion after the resin is placed in the cavity. Because the mode of vibration differs between the two devices, it is not appropriate to directly compare the results of the present study to those of studies using SonicFill.

The void volumes of all areas of interests were significantly greater in 4-mm bulk filling compared with those of 2-mm incremental filling, irrespective of vibration application. Although a greater reduction was seen with vibration, incremental filling of the bulk-fill resin using a conventional method also effectively reduced void formation. This can be explained by easier adaptation and relatively greater chances of void escape during placement of a relatively smaller amount of composite resin. In addition, a smaller amount of composite resin in each layer is associated with less shrinkage stress and exothermic heat generation during polymerization³⁷. The placement of bulk-fill composite resins in incremental layers could be recommended over bulk filling to minimize void formation and possible thermal damage to the pulp while still ensuring a reliable interface between teeth and resin restoration. Some voids were found at the middle of the cavity in the incremental filling group, but these were assumed to be entrapped voids between the incremental layers. Meticulous placement of resin increments should eliminate potential discrepancy between layers.

The findings of this study should be interpreted with caution given certain limitations. Only a nano-hybrid resin, FB, was used, and the effect of vibration on different composite resins of various viscosity should be subjected to further study because the effect of vibration would not be identical in other composite resin with varying compositions. Standardized cylindrical class I cavities were prepared for restoration, but different cavity designs can affect vibration propagation and composite resin adaptation. We were unable to directly compare the effects of vibratory device–related variables, such as vibration frequency, amplitude, and applicator tip design (all of which can alter vibrational properties), because no other vibratory devices designed for resin placement were available. However, our findings suggest a potential application of vibration during composite resin placement in terms of reducing void formation at the interface between the cavity and resin and within composite resin. Further studies are needed to validate the effect of vibration in composite resin restoration.

Within the limitations of this study, the following conclusions can be made.

Void formation varied depending on cavity area, layer thickness, and vibration application.
Void volume was markedly higher in the bottom part of the cavity, particularly around the corner of the cavity floor, in both layer thicknesses compared with the middle and top parts, regardless of vibration application.
Compared to bulk filling, the incrementally filled layers exhibited smaller void volumes in the bottom of the cavity, where vibration was effective in reducing void volume.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) (grant number NRF-2020R1F1A1075748). 

Authors contributions

Data curation, formal analysis, investigation, writing – original draft: YK. Conceptualization, formal analysis, methodology, supervision, Writing – review & editing, Validation: SB. Conceptualization, Formal analysis, funding acquisition, project administration; supervision; writing – review & editing: RK. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Data availability statement

The datasets generated during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

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. 43, 430–439. (2015)
Ferracane JL. Developing a more complete understanding of stresses produced in dental composites during polymerization. Dent. Mater. 21, 36–42. (2005).
Kwon Y, Ferracane J, Lee IB. Effect of layering methods, composite type, and flowable liner on the polymerization shrinkage stress of light cured composites. Dent. Mater. 28, 801–809. (2012).
Soares CJ, Bicalho AA, Tantbirojn D, Versluis A. Polymerization shrinkage stresses in a premolar restored with different composite resins and different incremental techniques. J. Adhes. Dent. 15, 341–350. (2013).
Yap AU. Effectiveness of polymerization in composite restoratives claiming bulk placement: impact of cavity depth and exposure time. Oper. Dent. 25, 113–120. (2000).
Garoushi S, Vallittu P, Shinya A, Lassila L. Influence of increment thickness on light transmission, degree of conversion and micro hardness of bulk fill composites. Odontology. 104, 291–297. (2016).
Benetti AR, Havndrup-Pedersen C, Honore D, Pedersen MK, Pallesen U. Bulk-fill resin composites: polymerization contraction, depth of cure, and gap formation. Oper. Dent. 40, 190–200. (2015).
Bucuta S, Ilie N. Light transmittance and micro-mechanical properties of bulk fill vs. conventional resin based composites. Clin. Oral. Investig. 18, 1991–2000. (2014).
Ilie N, Bucuta S, Draenert M. Bulk-fill resin-based composites: an in vitro assessment of their mechanical performance. Oper. Dent. 38, 618–625. (2013).
Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, Peters TC, Burgersdijk RC, Teunis M. Cavity wall adaptation and voids in adhesive Class I resin composite restorations. Dent. Mater. 12, 230–235. (1996).
Huysmans M-CD, van der Varst PG, Lautenschalger EP, Monaghan P. The influence of simulated clinical handling on the flexural and compressive strength of posterior composite restorative materials. Dent. Mater. 12, 116–120. (1996).
Purk JH, Dusevich V, Glaros A, Eick JD. Adhesive analysis of voids in class II composite resin restorations at the axial and gingival cavity walls restored under in vivo versus in vitro conditions. Dent. Mater. 23, 871–877. (2007).
Hirata R, Pacheco R, Caceres E, Janal M, Romero M, Giannini M, et al. Effect of sonic resin composite delivery on void formation assessed by micro-computed tomography. Oper. Dent. 43, 144–150. (2018).
Puckett AD, Fitchie JG, Kirk PC, Gamblin J. Direct composite restorative materials. Dent. Clin. North. Am.51, 659–675. (2007).
Han S-H, Lee I-B. Effect of vibration on adaptation of dental composites in simulated tooth cavities. Korea Aust. Rheol. J. 30, 241–248. (2018).
Lea SC, Landini G, Walmsley AD. Vibration characteristics of ultrasonic scalers assessed with scanning laser vibrometry. J. Dent. 30, 147–151. (2002).
Kim RJ, Choi NS, Ferracane J, Lee IB. Acoustic emission analysis of the effect of simulated pulpal pressure and cavity type on the tooth-composite interfacial de-bonding. Dent. Mater. 30, 876–883. (2014).
Opdam N, Feilzer A, Roeters J, Smale I. Class I occlusal composite resin restorations: in vivo post-operative sensitivity, wall adaptation, and microleakage. Am. J. Dent. 11, 229–234. (1998).
Opdam NJ, Roeters JJ, de Boer T, Pesschier D, Bronkhorst E. Voids and porosities in class I micropreparations filled with various resin composites. Oper. Dent. 28, 9–14. (2003).
Bayne SC, Thompson JY, Swift EJ, Jr., Stamatiades P, Wilkerson M. A characterization of first-generation flowable composites. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 129, 567–577. (1998).
Nie J, Yap AU, Wang XY. Influence of shrinkage and viscosity of flowable composite liners on cervical microleakage of class II restorations: A micro-CT analysis. Oper. Dent. 43, 656–664. (2018).
Alomari Q, Reinhardt JW, Boyera D. Effect of liners on cusp deflection and gap formation in composite restorations. Oper. Dent. 26, 406–411. (2001).
Metalwala Z, Khoshroo K, Rasoulianboroujeni M, Tahriri M, Johnson A, Baeten J, et al. Rheological properties of contemporary nanohybrid dental resin composites: The influence of preheating. Polym. Test. 72, 157–163. (2018).
Demirel G, Orhan AI, Irmak O, Aydin F, Buyuksungur A, Bilecenoglu B, et al. Effects of preheating and sonic delivery techniques on the internal adaptation of bulk-fill resin composites. Oper. Dent. 46, 226–233. (2021).
dos Santos RE, Lima AF, Soares GP, Ambrosano GM, Marchi GM, Lovadino JR, et al. Effect of preheating resin composite and light-curing units on the microleakage of Class II restorations submitted to thermocycling. Oper. Dent. 36, 60–65. (2011).
Froes-Salgado NR, Silva LM, Kawano Y, Francci C, Reis A, Loguercio AD. Composite pre-heating: effects on marginal adaptation, degree of conversion and mechanical properties. Dent. Mater. 26:908–914. (2010).
da Costa JB, Hilton TJ, Swift EJ, Jr. Critical appraisal: preheating composites. J. Esthet. Restor. Dent. 23, 269–275. (2011).
Lea SC, Felver B, Landini G, Walmsley AD. Three-dimensional analyses of ultrasonic scaler oscillations. J. Clin. Periodontol. 36, 44–50. (2009).
Poole RL, Lea SC, Dyson JE, Shortall AC, Walmsley AD. Vibration characteristics of dental high-speed turbines and speed-increasing handpieces. J. Dent. 36, 488–493. (2008).
Lea SC, Walmsley AD, Lumley PJ, Landini G. A new insight into the oscillation characteristics of endosonic files used in dentistry. Phys. Med. Biol. 49, 2095–2102. (2004).
Lea SC, Khan A, Patanwala HS, Landini G, Walmsley AD. The effects of load and toothpaste on powered toothbrush vibrations. J. Dent. 35, 350–354. (2007).
Lee I, Chang J, Ferracane J. Slumping resistance and viscoelasticity prior to setting of dental composites. Dent. Mater. 24, 1586–1593. (2008).
Poggio C, Chiesa M, Scribante A, Mekler J, Colombo M. Microleakage in Class II composite restorations with margins below the CEJ: in vitro evaluation of different restorative techniques. Med. Oral. Patol. Oral. Cir. Bucal. 18, 793–798. (2013).
Furness A, Tadros MY, Looney SW, Rueggeberg FA. Effect of bulk/incremental fill on internal gap formation of bulk-fill composites. J. Dent. 42, 439–449. (2014).
Kalmowicz J, Phebus JG, Owens BM, Johnson WW, King GT. Microleakage of class I and II composite resin restorations using a sonic-resin placement system. Oper. Dent. 40, 653–661. (2015).
Alqudaihi FS, Cook NB, Diefenderfer KE, Bottino MC, Platt JA. Comparison of internal adaptation of bulk-fill and increment-fill resin composite materials. Oper. Dent. 44, 32–44. (2019).
Kim RJ, Yi A, Eo SH, Lee IB, Seo DG. Temperature changes in bulk-fill resin composite during photopolymerization. Am. J. Dent. 28, 241–244. (2015).

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Editorial decision: Major revision
08 Nov, 2022
Reviews received at journal
05 Nov, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
27 Oct, 2022
Reviewers agreed at journal
12 Oct, 2022
Reviewers invited by journal
13 Sep, 2022
Editor assigned by journal
05 Sep, 2022
Editor invited by journal
24 Aug, 2022
Submission checks completed at journal
24 Aug, 2022
First submitted to journal
22 Aug, 2022

You are reading this latest preprint version

Does vibration improve cavity adaptation of composite resin?

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Method And Materials

2.1. Rheological measurement of composite resin

2.2. Vibration measurement with a scanning laser doppler vibrometer

2.3 Resin vibration measurement using a scanning laser doppler vibrometer

2.4. Adaptation evaluation using micro-CT

2.4.1. Specimen preparation

2.4.2. Restorative procedure

2.4.3. Evaluation of surface adaptation and void volume using micro-CT

2.4.4. Statistical analysis

3. Results

3.1. Rheological measurements

3.2. Evaluation of device frequency and amplitude

3.3. Evaluation of resin vibration using SLDV

3.3. Micro-CT analysis

3.3.1. Evaluation of surface adaptation at the cavity floor

3.3.2. Evaluation of 3D void volume

4. Discussion

5. Conclusion

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1