Effect of Different Liners on Fracture Resistance of Premolars Restored with Conventional and Short Fiber-Reinforced Composite Resins

Fereshteh Shafiei,Maryam Doozandeh,Dordaneh Ghaffaripour

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.12743

Abstract:Purpose: To see whether applying four different liners under short fiber-reinforced composite (SFRC), everX Posterior, compared to conventional composite resin, Z250, affected their strengthening property in premolar MOD cavities. Materials and methods: Mesio-occluso-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared in 120 sound maxillary premolars divided into 10 groups (n = 12) in terms of two composite resin types and 4 liners or no liner. For each composite resin, in 5 groups no liner, resin-modified glass ionomer (RMGI), conventional flowable composite (COFL), self-adhesive flowable composite resin (SAFL), and self-adhesive resin cement (SARC) were applied prior to restoring incrementally. After water storage and thermocycling, static fracture resistance was tested. Data (in Newtons) were analyzed using two-way ANOVA (α = 0.05). Results: Fracture resistance was significantly affected by composite resin type (p = 0.02), but not by the liner (p > 0.05). The interaction of the two factors was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). SFRC exhibited higher fracture strength (1470 ± 200 N) compared to conventional composite resin (1350 ± 290), irrespective of the application of liners. Application of SARC and SAFL liners led to a higher number of restorable fractures for both composite resins. Conclusions: The four liners can be used without interfering with the higher efficacy of SFRC, compared to conventional composite resins, to improve the fracture strength of premolar MOD cavities.