Citation Information :
Patil S, Jobanputra L, Mehta F, Kalena K, Parmar A, Atigre P. Effect of Different Flowable Liners under Packable Composite on the Cuspal Deflection in Maxillary Premolar Teeth: An In Vitro Study. World J Dent 2024; 15 (6):526-530.
Aim: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of different flowable liners on cuspal deflection (CD) in extracted maxillary premolars that have been restored using bulk-fill composite.
Materials and methods: A total of 48 mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared in extracted human maxillary premolar teeth. The preparations (n = 12) were randomly divided into four groups. Groups I, II, and III were lined with Neo Spectra ST, Tetric N-Ceram, and Filtek 3M liners, respectively, and all were further restored using Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill composite. The control group, group IV, received Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill packable composite. In this study, CD was measured using a digital micrometer, and measurements were recorded in millimeters.
Results: Cuspal deflection mean values were statistically significant immediately after restoration (CD2) and post 24 hours of restoration (CD3) in all groups, with group IV, in which no liner was used, showing maximum deflection and group II showing minimal deflection compared to all other groups. The intergroup comparison showed no significant difference between groups I, II, and III, but all three groups were statistically significant when compared to group IV. Hence, restorations in which liner was used recorded less CD compared to those in which no liner was used, indicating higher polymerization stresses in that group.
Conclusion: The application of a liner has a positive impact on CD, reducing it by decreasing polymerization shrinkage, distributing stress, and improving marginal adaptation.
Clinical significance: Minimizing CD in dentistry prevents cohesive and adhesive restorative failures and prolongs the lifespan of dental restorations by reducing stress on them. In this study, it was proven that restorations lined with a liner recorded less deflection than those in which no liner was used.
Ilie N, Hickel R. Silorane-based dental composite: behavior and abilities. Dent Mater J 2006;25(3):445–454. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.25.445
Tantbirojn D, Versluis A, Pintado MR, et al. Tooth deformation patterns in molars after composite restoration. Dent Mater 2004;20(6):535–542. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2003.05.008
Watts DC, Cash AJ. Determination of polymerization shrinkage kinetics in visible-light-cured materials: methods development. Dent Mater 1991;7(4):281–287. DOI: 10.1016/S0109-5641(05)80030-2
de Gee AH, Davison CL, Smith A. A modified dilatometer for continuous recording of volumetric polymerization shrinkage of composite restorative materials. J Dent 1981;9(1):36–42. DOI: 10.1016/0300-5712(81)90033-6
Sharp LJ, Choi IB, Lee TE, et al. Volumetric shrinkage of composites using video-imaging. J Dent 2003;31(2):97–103. DOI: 10.1016/S0300-5712(03)00005-8
Kleverlaan CJ, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and contraction stress of dental resin composites. Dent Mater 2005;21(12):1150–1157. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2005.02.004
Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Determinants of in vitro gap formation of resin composites. J Dent 2004;32(2):109–115. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2003.08.008
Almuhaiza MS, Magdy NM. Cuspal deflection and fracture resistance in maxillary premolar teeth restored with bulk-fill flowable resin-based composite materials. Int J Health Sci Res 2018;8(3):105–112.
Agarwal PM, Taneja S, Kumar M. To evaluate and compare the effect of different light-curing modes and different liners on cuspal deflection in premolar teeth restored with bulk filled or incrementally filled composite measured at different time intervals. J Conserv Dent 2017;20(5):317–321. DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_328_16
Alomari QD, Reinhardt JW, Boyera DB. Effect of liners on cusp deflection and gap formation in composite restorations. Operative Dent 2001;26(4):406–411. PMID: 11504442.
Jantarat J, Panitvisai P, Palamara JE, et al. Comparison of methods for measuring cuspal deformation in teeth. J Dent 2001;29(1):75–82. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(00)00040-3
Meredith N, Setchell DJ. In vitro measurement of cuspal strain and displacement in composite restored teeth. J Dent 1997;25(3):331–337. DOI: 10.1016/s0300-5712(96)00047-4
Alomari QD, Mansour YF. Effect of LED curing modes on cusp deflection and hardness of composite restorations. Oper Dent 2005;30(6):684–689. PMID: 16382590.
González López S, Sanz Chinesta MV, Ceballos García L, et al. Influence of cavity type and size of composite restorations on cuspal flexure. Med Oral Patología Oral y Cirugía Bucal 2006;11(6):E536–E540. PMID: 17072261.
Gonzalez-Lopez S, Lucena-Martin C, de Haro-Gasquet F, et al. Influence of different composite restoration techniques on cuspal deflection: an in vitro study. Oper Dent 2004;29(6):656–660. PMID: 15646221.
Moorthy A, Hogg CH, Dowling AH, et al. Cuspal deflection and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with bulk-fill flowable resin-based composite base materials. J Dent 2012;40(6):500–505. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2012.02.015
Mehta F, Jobanputra L, Patil S, et al. Evaluation of fracture resistance in maxillary premolar teeth restored with flowable resin-based composite as a liner under packable composite- an in vitro study. Indian J Appl Res 2023;13(10):45–48. DOI: 10.36106/ijar
Van Ende A, De Munck J, Van Landuyt KL, et al. Bulk-filling of high C-factor posterior cavities: effect on adhesion to cavity-bottom dentin. Dent Mater 2013;29(3):269–277. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2012.11.002
Kaisarly D, Meierhofer D, El Gezawi M, et al. Effects of flowable liners on the shrinkage vectors of bulk-fill composites. Clin Oral Investig 2021:1–4. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-021-03801-2