| Popis: |
Objectives This study compared the cuspal deflection and marginal microleakage following the application of bulk-fill and conventional composite resins. Materials and Methods 70 sound premolars with MOD preparation were randomized into 5 groups (n = 14). In three groups, the cavities were restored with Tetric Ceram N, X-tra fil, and Opus bulk-fill composite resins. In the remaining two groups, the cavities were restored with P60 conventional composite with 2 mm (incremental technique) and 4 mm (bulk-fill technique) increments. Cuspal deflection was measured by a digital micrometer. After aging, marginal microleakage was assessed. Data were analyzed by repeated measures one-way and two-way ANOVA, and Tukey, Bonferroni, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney, Friedman, Wilcoxon signed rank, and t tests. Results Cuspal deflection of bulk-fill composite groups was lower than that of conventional composite applied incrementally (P 0.05). Microleakage at the cervical cementum margin of proximal box was significantly higher than that at the cervical and occlusal enamel margins of proximal box (P = 0.001). Conclusion the cuspal deflection in bulk-fill composite restoration was lower than that in the conventional composite in incremental technique but marginal microleakage of bulk-fill and conventional composite resin restorations were comparable. |
