Cargando…

Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study

Bioactive materials have emerged as a promising alternative to conventional restorative materials as part of more conservative dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and microleakage of a new bioactive restorative material, two bulk-fill restorativ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Martínez-Sabio, Laura, Peñate, Lissethe, Arregui, María, Veloso Duran, Ana, Blanco, José Raúl, Guinot, Francisco
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10346547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37447487
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym15132840
_version_ 1785073338114113536
author Martínez-Sabio, Laura
Peñate, Lissethe
Arregui, María
Veloso Duran, Ana
Blanco, José Raúl
Guinot, Francisco
author_facet Martínez-Sabio, Laura
Peñate, Lissethe
Arregui, María
Veloso Duran, Ana
Blanco, José Raúl
Guinot, Francisco
author_sort Martínez-Sabio, Laura
collection PubMed
description Bioactive materials have emerged as a promising alternative to conventional restorative materials as part of more conservative dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and microleakage of a new bioactive restorative material, two bulk-fill restorative composites, and a conventional composite at 24 h, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. Three hundred and sixty molars and premolars were divided into four groups: ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE Restorative™, Filtek™ Bulk-Fill Restorative Composite, Tetric(®) N-Ceram Bulk-Fill Composite, and G-aenial(®) Composite. The normality of the data was determined with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, then the two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s test were used for analyzing SBS data, and the Kruskal-Wallis and DSCF tests were conducted to analyze the microleakage. In the SBS test, there were no statistically significant differences between materials (p = 0.587), and the relation between material and time (p = 0.467), time points showed statistically significant differences (p = 0.016). As for the microleakage, statistically significant differences were found for all three time periods (p < 0.05), showing the conventional composite to have the lowest microleakage, followed by the bioactive material, and lastly the two bulk-fill composites. In conclusion, the new bioactive material has similar evaluated properties to bulk-fill composites (bond strength) and conventional composites (bond strength and microleakage) and can be used as an alternative restorative material.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10346547
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103465472023-07-15 Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study Martínez-Sabio, Laura Peñate, Lissethe Arregui, María Veloso Duran, Ana Blanco, José Raúl Guinot, Francisco Polymers (Basel) Article Bioactive materials have emerged as a promising alternative to conventional restorative materials as part of more conservative dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and microleakage of a new bioactive restorative material, two bulk-fill restorative composites, and a conventional composite at 24 h, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. Three hundred and sixty molars and premolars were divided into four groups: ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE Restorative™, Filtek™ Bulk-Fill Restorative Composite, Tetric(®) N-Ceram Bulk-Fill Composite, and G-aenial(®) Composite. The normality of the data was determined with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, then the two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s test were used for analyzing SBS data, and the Kruskal-Wallis and DSCF tests were conducted to analyze the microleakage. In the SBS test, there were no statistically significant differences between materials (p = 0.587), and the relation between material and time (p = 0.467), time points showed statistically significant differences (p = 0.016). As for the microleakage, statistically significant differences were found for all three time periods (p < 0.05), showing the conventional composite to have the lowest microleakage, followed by the bioactive material, and lastly the two bulk-fill composites. In conclusion, the new bioactive material has similar evaluated properties to bulk-fill composites (bond strength) and conventional composites (bond strength and microleakage) and can be used as an alternative restorative material. MDPI 2023-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10346547/ /pubmed/37447487 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym15132840 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Martínez-Sabio, Laura
Peñate, Lissethe
Arregui, María
Veloso Duran, Ana
Blanco, José Raúl
Guinot, Francisco
Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title_full Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title_fullStr Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title_short Comparison of Shear Bond Strength and Microleakage between Activa™ Bioactive Restorative™ and Bulk-Fill Composites—An In Vitro Study
title_sort comparison of shear bond strength and microleakage between activa™ bioactive restorative™ and bulk-fill composites—an in vitro study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10346547/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37447487
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym15132840
work_keys_str_mv AT martinezsabiolaura comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy
AT penatelissethe comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy
AT arreguimaria comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy
AT velosoduranana comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy
AT blancojoseraul comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy
AT guinotfrancisco comparisonofshearbondstrengthandmicroleakagebetweenactivabioactiverestorativeandbulkfillcompositesaninvitrostudy