Behaviour of general dental practitioners in Germany regarding posterior restorations with flowable composites

Because the recommendation to use flowables for posterior restorations is still a matter of debate, the objective of this study was to determine in a nationwide survey in Germany how frequently, for what indications, and for what reasons, German dentists use flowable composites in posterior teeth. In addition, the acceptance of a simplified filling technique for posterior restorations using a low stress flowable composite was evaluated. Completed questionnaires from all over Germany were returned by 1,449 dentists resulting in a response rate of 48.5%; 78.6% of whom regularly used flowable composites for posterior restorations. The most frequent indications were cavity lining (80.1%) and small Class I fillings (74.2%). Flowables were less frequently used for small Class II fillings (22.7%) or other indications (13.6%). Most frequent reasons given for the use of flowables in posterior teeth were the prevention of voids (71.7%) and superior adaptation to cavity walls (72.9%), whereas saving time was considered less important (13.8%). Based on the subjective opinion of the dentists the simplified filling technique seemed to deliver advantages compared to the methods used to date particularly with regard to good cavity adaptation and ease of use. In conclusion, resin composites are the standard material type used for posterior restorations by general dental practitioners in Germany and most dentists use flowable composites as liners.

Depth of cure of resin composites: is the ISO 4049 method suitable for bulk fill materials?

To evaluate if depth of cure D(ISO) determined by the ISO 4049 method is accurately reflected with bulk fill materials when compared to depth of cure D(new) determined by Vickers microhardness profiles.

Microhardness and marginal adaptation of pre-warmed composites

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of pre-warmed composite on the microhardness and marginal adaptation. Methods: Ninety six identical class II cavities were prepared in extracted human molars and filled/cured in three 2 mm increments using a metal matrix. Two composites (Tetric Evo Ceram (IvoclarVivadent) and ELS(Saremco)) were cured with a LED curing unit (Bluephase (IvoclarVivadent)) using curing cycles of 20 and 40 seconds. The composite was used at room temperature or pre-warmed at 54.5ºC (Calset(AdDent)). Twelve teeth were filled for every composite-curing time-composite temperature combination. The teeth were thermocycled (1000 cycles at 5º and 55ºC) and then stored at 37° C for seven days . Dye penetration (basic fuchsine 5% for 8 hours) was measured using a score scale. Knoop microhardness was determined 100, 200, 500, 1000, 1500, 2500, 3500, 4500 and 5500µm from the occlusal surface at a distance of 150 and 1000µm from the metal matrix. The total degree of polymerization of a composite specimen was determined by calculating the area under the hardness curve. Results: Statistical analyses showed no difference in marginal adaptation (p>0.05). Hardness values at 150µm from the matrix were lower than those at 1000µm. There was an increase of the microhardness at the top of each increment and decrease towards the bottom of each increment. Longer curing times resulted in harder composite samples. Multiple linear regression showed that only the curing time (p<0.001) and composite material (p<0.001) had a significant association with the degree of polymerization. The degree of polymerization was not influenced by pre-warming the composite at a temperature of 54.5ºC (p=4.86). Conclusion: Polymerization time can not be reduced by pre-warming the composite on a temperature of 54.5ºC. The marginal adaptation is not compromised by pre-warming the composite.

Effect of zirconia surface treatments on the shear strength of zirconia/veneering ceramic composites

Aim of the investigation was to assess the effect of different surface treatments on the bond strength of veneering ceramics to zirconia. In a shear test, the influences of polishing, sandblasting, and silica-coating of the zirconia surface on bonding were assessed with five different veneering ceramics. In addition the effect of liner application was examined. With one veneering ceramic, the impact of regeneration firing of zirconia was also evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA and post hoc Scheffé's test. Failure in every case occurred in the veneering ceramic adjacent to the interface with a thin layer of ceramic remaining on the zirconia surface, indicating that bond strength was higher than the cohesive strength of the veneering ceramic. Shear strength ranged from 23.5 +/- 3.4 MPa to 33.0 +/- 6.8 MPa without explicit correlation to the respective surface treatment. Regeneration firing significantly decreased the shear strength of both polished and sandblasted surfaces. Findings of this study revealed that bonding between veneering ceramics and zirconia might be based on chemical bonds. On this note, sandblasting was not a necessary surface pretreatment to enhance bond strength and that regeneration firing was not recommended.