Evaluation of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites regarding marginal and internal adaptation.

This study aimed at evaluating the marginal and internal adaptation of low-viscosity bulk-fill composites to enamel and dentin using a self-etch or an etch-and-rinse adhesive without and with artificial ageing. Hundred and twenty-eight MOD cavities in extracted molars were assigned to eight groups (n = 16), restored with the adhesives OptiBond FL (OFL) or Xeno V+ (X) and two low-viscosity bulk-fill composites SDR or x-tra base, covered with Premise. Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill and Premise served as a control. n = 8 per group were subjected to prolonged water storage (180 days) and thermocycling (2500×). Scanning electron microscopy was used to determine marginal gaps (MG) and interfacial adhesive defects (IAD). There were no significant differences between composite types in 44 out of 48 (MG) or 43/48 (IAD) comparisons. More MG were observed with X than with OFL (14 out of 16 comparisons, two significant), while in 16 of 16 comparisons with X more IAD were observed (14 significant). After artificial ageing, MG generally increased (9/16 significant), compared to IAD (one significant). The performance of the investigated composite types concerning the integrity of the tooth-composites interface was comparable. Compared to the 1-step self-etch system, the bond with the 3-step etch-and-rinse adhesive was raised.

Correction to: Internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites in class II cavities placed with different adhesive strategies.

In the original publication of the article the paragraph "The four resin-based composites…" appearing below the "Materials and methods" section is incomplete. The correct paragraph is provided in this correction below.

Internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites in class II cavities placed with different adhesive strategies.

The aim of this study was to evaluate internal and marginal adaptation of high-viscosity bulk-fill composites to enamel and dentin with a self-etch (SE) and an etch-and-rinse adhesive (ER) without and with artificial aging. 128 MOD cavities in extracted human molars were prepared, randomly assigned to 8 groups (n = 16), bonded with either OptiBond FL (OFL, ER) or Xeno V+ (X, SE), and restored in 4 mm horizontal bulk layers with SonicFill (SF), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk fill (TEC), and x-tra fil (XF). Incremental layering technique with Premise (P) served as control. Half of the specimens each (n = 8) were subjected either to water storage (1 day, 37 °C) or prolonged storage (180 days) and thereafter thermocycling. Replicas were analyzed for marginal gap formation. After sectioning, interfacial adhesive defects were assessed. Results were statistical analyzed. (1) Internal adaptation: Except for TEC/OFL at enamel without artificial aging, no significant differences between bulk-fill composites and the control were observed. All groups at dentin with OFL showed less internal adhesive defects than that with X (p < 0.05). (2) Marginal adaptation: No significant differences were observed between bulk-fill composites and control except for P after artificial aging (p > 0.05). All other composites, regardless of artificial aging, formed significantly more marginal gaps at enamel with X compared to with OFL (p ≤ 0.05). Simplified restorations with high-viscosity bulk-fill composite showed comparable internal and marginal adaptation to incrementally placed fillings. A superiority of the 3-step ER approach was seen compared to the 1-step SE adhesive irrespective of the bulk-fill composite used.