Effect of Composite Resin and Restorative Technique on Polymerization Shrinkage Stress, Cuspal Strain and Fracture Load of Weakened Premolars.

PURPOSE To compare shrinkage stress, cuspal strain and fracture load of weakened premolars restored with different conventional and bulk-fill composite resins and restorative techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fifty premolars received a 4.0 x 3.5mm mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) class II preparation. The lingual and buccal cups were internally weakened. Specimens were restored according to the following 5 groups: Filtek Z350 XT/10 increments; Filtek Z350 XT/8 increments (both 3M Oral Care); Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative + Filtek Z350 XT (both 3M Oral Care); SDR + Spectra Basic (Dentsply Sirona); and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (Ivoclar Vivadent). Cuspal strains were measured using strain gauges (n = 10). After restoration, specimens were submitted to thermal/mechanical cycles and fractured. Post-gel shrinkage of the composites was determined. Additionally, residual shrinkage strains and stresses were analyzed using three-dimensional finite element analysis (3D-FEA). The data were statistically analyzed using one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD (α = 0.05). RESULTS One-way ANOVA revealed statistically significant differences among composite resins (p < 0.001) for the post-gel shrinkage. Filtek Z350 XT had the highest post-gel shrinkage and no difference was found between Spectra Basic and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill (p = 0.110). The Filtek Z350 XT/10 increments, Filtek Z350 XT/8 increments and Filtek Bulk Fill Flowable Restorative/Filtek Z350 XT had statistically significantly higher cuspal deformation values when compared to the SDR/Spectra Basic and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill techniques. 3D-FEA confirmed higher stress levels in the incrementally filled conventional restorations. Fracture loads were not statistically significantly different. CONCLUSION The bulk-fill restoration techniques resulted in less cuspal strain and stress than the incremental technique with conventional composite resin. Fracture resistance was not affected by the restorative techniques.