The effect of filling technique on the cuspal strain, polymerization shrinkage stress, enamel crack formation and depth of cure of restored molars

Objective: Evaluate the effect of different restorative filling techniques on the residual shrinkage stress (ShrS), cuspal strain (CS), depth of cure (DC), and enamel crack formation (Ec) in molars with MOD restorations. Methods: Post-gel shrinkage, elastic modulus, compressive and diametral tensile strength of the Filtek One Bulk Fill composite were calculated. Sixty molars with MOD preparations were restored using four filling techniques: Bulk; Horizontal; Oblique; Natural enamel and dentin substitution (NEDS) technique. CS was measured using a strain gauge (n = 10). The DC (n = 5) was measured using Knoop hardness. Shrinkage stress/strain was analyzed using 3D finite element analysis. The Ec analysis was carried out by transillumination. Two-way ANOVA with repeated measures and Tukey's HSD test (alpha = 0.05) was performed for the CS data. Two-Way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test was performed for the DC data (alpha = 0.05). Results: CS was higher at the lingual cusp for the horizontal and NEDS technique. No statis-tical difference was found between the buccal and lingual CS values for the Bulk (p = 0.367) or Oblique techniques (p = 0.192). CS values were lower for the Bulk. More enamel cracks were found for the Bulk. DC was lower at 4 mm regardless the filling technique. The Horizontal showed the highest ShrS values. The Bulk generated the lower ShrS values. Significance: A Bulk technique caused the lowest shrinkage stress/strain. An Oblique technique yielded the best balance between stress, strain and crack formation. NEDS technique is a good alternative to decrease the number of increments while maintaining the stress levels nearby the Oblique technique. (c) 2022 The Academy of Dental Materials. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

CS values were higher at lingual cusp for Horizontal and NEDS techniques. No statistical difference was found for Bulk or Oblique techniques. Bulk showed lower CS values and more enamel cracks. DC was lower at 4 mm regardless of technique.