Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate interfacial three-dimensional adaptation and internal voids of different flowable materials before and after cyclic fatigue in a simulated deep-margin elevation scenario. Methods: Eighty (n = 80) extracted premolars were selected and two Class II cavities were prepared. The mesial one with cervical margin 1 mm above the cementum-enamel junction (CEJ) and the distal one with cervical margin 1 mm below the CEJ. After performing adhesive procedures, specimens were divided into four groups according to the employed materials for 2 mm horizontal deep-margin relocation: nanohybrid composite (Clearfil ES2, Kuraray); conventional viscosity flowable composite (Tetric Flow, Ivoclar); medium viscosity flowable composite (Majesty ES2 Low Flow, Kuraray); high viscosity flowable composite (Majesty ES2 Super Low Flow, Kuraray). All restorations were finalized by oblique layering with nanohybrid composite (Clearfil ES2, Kuraray). To reveal interfacial and internal gap progression, specimens were scanned with a micro-CT (SkyScan 1172), before and after 500,000 cycles of mechanical chewing simulation (50 N, 1 Hz). Data were imported into Mimics software after smoothing and region growing. Only the 2 mm margin relocation volumes were considered. Obtained masks were analyzed for noise removal and volume calculation. At baseline, interfacial gap progression and internal voids, expressed in mm3, were collected and statistically analyzed with two-way ANOVA (α 0.05) for the variables substrate and restorative materials followed by Tukey post-hoc test. An additional two-way ANOVA test, followed by Tukey post-hoc test, was performed to evaluate variation in interfacial gap progression after mechanical aging. Results: At baseline, the ANOVA test showed a significant difference for the variable restorative materials (p = 0.01). More specifically, the Tukey post-hoc test revealed that the highly filled medium viscosity composite performed better than the conventional viscosity composite at baseline for the interfacial gap. The internal voids ANOVA test at baseline reported no significant differences for the variable tested. Analysis of variance for internal gap progression after thermocycling showed no differences for both substrate and restorative material employed. Conclusions: Highly filled medium viscosity composite performed significantly better than the conventional viscosity flowable composite for what concern baseline interfacial gaps. Artificial aging with a chewing simulator and thermocycling did not affect interfacial gap progression on enamel and dentin. The tested restorative materials performed equally after aging.

[Micro-CT observations of the adaptation at gingival wall in Class II restorations with different dental restorative materials]

Effects of the lining material, thickness and coverage on residual stress of class II molar restorations by multilayer technique

Comparison of Class II Bulk-Fill, Self-Adhesive Composites, Alkasite, and High-Viscosity Glass Ionomer Restorations in Terms of Marginal and Internal Adaptation

Internal Adaptation of Composite Fillings Made Using Universal Adhesives—A Micro-Computed Tomography Analysis

Three-Dimensional Internal Voids and Marginal Adaptation in Deep Margin Elevation Technique: Efficiency of Highly Filled Flowable Composites

Influence of Curing Mode and Layering Technique on the 3D Interfacial Gap of Bulk-fill Resin Composites in Deep Class-I Restorations: A Micro-CT Volumetric Study

Influence of Shrinkage and Viscosity of Flowable Composite Liners on Cervical Microleakage of Class II Restorations: A Micro-CT Analysis.

Real-time Imaging and Quantitative Analysis of Internal Gap Formation in Bulk-fill and Conventional Resin Composites: An OCT Evaluation

Clinical evaluation of Giomer and self-etch adhesive compared with nanofilled resin composite and etch-and-rinse adhesive – Results at 8 years

Marginal Adaptation of Flowable vs Sonically Activated or Preheated Resin Composites in Cervical Lesions

Evaluation of Adaptation of Root Canal Filled with Three Obturation Techniques in Vitro

Evaluation of Microvoid and Microleakage Potential of Bulk-Fill Resin Composites in MOD Restorations

A Comparative Clinical Study of the Self-Adhering Flowable Composite Resin Vertise Flow and the Traditional Flowable Composite Resin Premise Flowable

Comparative hardness and modulus of tooth-colored restoratives: A depth-sensing microindentation study

Comparative evaluation of microleakage between bulk esthetic materials versus resin-modified glass ionomer to restore Class II cavities in primary molars

Comparison of marginal adaptation of mineral trioxide aggregate, glass ionomer cement and intermediate restorative material as root-end filling materials, using scanning electron microscope: An in vitro study

Restoration integrity, but not material or cementation strategy determined secondary caries lesions next to indirect restorations in vitro

The Effect of Gravity on Marginal Integrity of Different Flowable Bulk-Fill Resin Composites

Dentin adhesion of bulk-fill composites and universal adhesives in class I-cavities with high C-factor

Highly-filled flowable composite in deep margin elevation: FEA study obtained from a microCT real model

Evaluation of surface microhardness and gingival marginal adaptation of three different bulk‐fill flowable resin composites: A comparative study