RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the influence of different composite resin in the customization of glass fiber posts (GFPs) on bond strength and failure mode. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty bovine roots were selected. The wall roots were reduced so that each wall had a minimum dentin thickness of 1 mm. Thirty GFPs were divided into three groups (n = 10), which received different types of customization. The first had the GFP relined by bulk-fill flowable composite resin (BF), the second group had the GFP customized by conventional regular composite resin (CR), and the third group was cemented with dual resin cements (DRC), without relining. The root were sectioned, resulting in two 1.0-mm thick slices from cervical root regions only and push-out bond strength test was performed (EMIC, Universal testing machine). To determine failure mode, a stereomicroscope was used at ×40 magnification, with a 2.5D analysis. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05) and Tukey's test. RESULTS: BF (9.08 ± 1.9) and CR (9.17 ± 3.00) did not show a statistically significant difference (p = 0.961), regarding the bond strength test values. However, there was a statistically significant difference between DRC (5.44 ± 1.89) and the others (p < 0.05). BF (66.66%) and the CR group (47.61%) presented a predominantly failure mode type 6: mixed between resin cement and composite. While the highest failure index of the DRC group was type 2: adhesive between resin cement and dentin (47.61%). CONCLUSION: BF can be an alternative for the customization of fiber posts, since it presented a similar behavior to the established technique with conventional composites.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To compare shrinkage stress, cuspal strain and fracture load of weakened premolars restored with different conventional and bulk-fill composite resins and restorative techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty premolars received a 4.0 x 3.5mm mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) class II preparation. The lingual and buccal cups were internally weakened. Specimens were restored according to the following 5 groups: Filtek Z350 XT/10 increments; Filtek Z350 XT/8 increments (both 3M Oral Care); Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative + Filtek Z350 XT (both 3M Oral Care); SDR + Spectra Basic (Dentsply Sirona); and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (Ivoclar Vivadent). Cuspal strains were measured using strain gauges (n = 10). After restoration, specimens were submitted to thermal/mechanical cycles and fractured. Post-gel shrinkage of the composites was determined. Additionally, residual shrinkage strains and stresses were analyzed using three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D-FEA). The data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α = 0.05). RESULTS: One-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences among composite resins (p < 0.001) for the post-gel shrinkage. Filtek Z350 XT had the highest post-gel shrinkage and no difference was found between Spectra Basic and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (p = 0.110). The Filtek Z350 XT/10 increments, Filtek Z350 XT/8 increments and Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative/Filtek Z350 XT had statistically significantly higher cuspal deformation values when compared to the SDR/Spectra Basic and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill techniques. 3D-FEA confirmed higher stress levels in the incrementally filled conventional restorations. Fracture loads were not statistically significantly different. CONCLUSION: The bulk-fill restoration techniques resulted in less cuspal strain and stress than the incremental technique with conventional composite resin. Fracture resistance was not affected by the restorative techniques.