Bulk Fill Kompozit Rezinler
Özet
Dental uygulamalarda zaman tasarrufu sağlamak ve tabakalama tekniğinin dezavantajlarını gidermek amacıyla geliştirilen bulk fill kompozit rezinler; yapısal, mekanik ve klinik özellikleri açısından sürekli olarak geliştirilmektedir. Geleneksel kompozitlerin aksine 4-6 mm kalınlıkta tek tabaka halinde uygulanabilen bu materyaller, artan translusens özellikleri ve modifiye edilmiş monomer/başlatıcı sistemleri sayesinde yüksek polimerizasyon derinliği ile düşük büzülme stresi sunar. Viskozitelerine göre akışkan, kondanse edilebilir ve dual-cure olarak sınıflandırılan bulk fill kompozitlerin mekanik başarıları doldurucu oranlarına doğrudan bağlıdır; özellikle düşük viskoziteli olanların mekanik dirençlerinin yetersizliği nedeniyle oklüzal ve proksimal yüzeylerde geleneksel kompozitlerle örtülmesi önerilmektedir. Klinik başarıyı etkileyen en önemli faktörler arasında ışık cihazının gücü, kavite tabanına olan uzaklık ve dönüşüm derecesi yer alırken, yetersiz polimerizasyonun post-operatif hassasiyete ve marjinal sızıntılara yol açabileceği belirtilmektedir. Büzülme stresi ve marjinal boşluk oluşumu konularındaki in vitro çalışmalar bulk fill lehine umut verici sonuçlar verse de, materyallerin uzun dönem in vivo etkinliklerinin tam olarak değerlendirilebilmesi için daha fazla randomize klinik araştırmaya ihtiyaç duyulmaktadır. Klinisyenlerin mevcut materyal çeşitliliği karşısında vaka gereksinimlerine ve üretici talimatlarına göre dikkatli seçim yapması önem arz etmektedir.
Bulk fill composite resins, developed to provide time savings in dental applications and overcome the disadvantages of the layering technique, are continuously being improved in terms of their structural, mechanical, and clinical properties. Unlike conventional composites, these materials can be applied in a single bulk layer of 4-6 mm, offering high polymerization depth and low shrinkage stress thanks to their enhanced translucency and modified monomer/initiator systems. Categorized as flowable, packable, and dual-cure based on viscosity, the mechanical success of bulk fill composites depends directly on filler ratios; particularly due to the insufficient mechanical resistance of low-viscosity types, capping them with conventional composites on occlusal and proximal surfaces is recommended. While light curing unit power, distance to the cavity floor, and degree of conversion are crucial factors affecting clinical success, inadequate polymerization can lead to post-operative sensitivity and marginal leakage. Although in vitro studies on shrinkage stress and marginal gap formation yield promising results in favor of bulk fill, more randomized clinical trials are required to fully evaluate the long-term in vivo efficacy of these materials. It is crucial for clinicians to make careful selections based on case requirements and manufacturer instructions given the variety of available materials.
Referanslar
Abbas, G., Fleming, G., Harrington, E., Shortall, A., & Burke, F. (2003). Cuspal movement and microleakage in premolar teeth restored with a packable composite cured in bulk or in increments. Journal of dentistry, 31(6), 437-444.
Alrahlah, A., Silikas, N., & Watts, D. (2014). Post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill dental resin-composites. Dental Materials, 30(2), 149-154.
Alshali, R. Z., Silikas, N., & Satterthwaite, J. D. (2013). Degree of conversion of bulk-fill compared to conventional resin-composites at two time intervals. Dental Materials, 29(9), e213-e217.
Aydın, N., Karaoğlanoğlu, S., Oktay, E. A., Topçu, F. T., & Demir, F. (2019). Diş hekimliğinde bulk fill kompozit rezinler. Selcuk Dental Journal, 6(2), 229-238.
Barutcigil, Ç., Barutcigil, K., Özarslan, M. M., Dündar, A., & Yilmaz, B. (2018). Color of bulk‐fill composite resin restorative materials. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry, 30(2), E3-E8.
Bayraktar, Y., Ercan, E., Hamidi, M. M., & Çolak, H. (2017). One‐year clinical evaluation of different types of bulk‐fill composites. Journal of investigative and clinical dentistry, 8(2), e12210.
Bucuta, S., & Ilie, N. (2014). Light transmittance and micro-mechanical properties of bulk fill vs. conventional resin based composites. Clinical oral investigations, 18(8), 1991-2000.
Cantekin, K., & Gumus, H. (2014). In vitro and clinical outcome of sandwich restorations with a bulk-fill flowable composite liner for pulpotomized primary teeth. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry, 38(4), 349-354.
Chesterman, J., Jowett, A., Gallacher, A., & Nixon, P. (2017). Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review. British dental journal, 222(5), 337-344.
El-Damanhoury, H., & Platt, J. (2014). Polymerization shrinkage stress kinetics and related properties of bulk-fill resin composites. Operative dentistry, 39(4), 374-382.
Engelhardt, F., Hahnel, S., Preis, V., & Rosentritt, M. (2016). Comparison of flowable bulk-fill and flowable resin-based composites: an in vitro analysis. Clinical oral investigations, 20(8), 2123-2130.
Eryuva, H. (2020). Bi̇r Bulk-Fi̇ll Kompozi̇ti̇n Kli̇ni̇k Olarak Değerlendi̇ri̇lmesi̇. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi,
Feilzer, A. J., De Gee, A. J., & Davidson, C. (1987). Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. Journal of Dental Research, 66(11), 1636-1639.
Fraga, M. A. A., Correr-Sobrinho, L., Sinhoreti, M. A. C., Carletti, T. M., & Correr, A. B. (2021). Do dual-cure bulk-fill resin composites reduce gaps and improve depth of cure. Brazilian Dental Journal, 32, 77-86.
Garcia, D., Yaman, P., Dennison, J., & Neiva, G. (2014). Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of bulk fill flowable composite resins. Operative dentistry, 39(4), 441-448.
Ilie, N., & Hickel, R. (2011). Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology. Dental Materials, 27(4), 348-355.
Ilie, N., Keßler, A., & Durner, J. (2013). Influence of various irradiation processes on the mechanical properties and polymerisation kinetics of bulk-fill resin based composites. Journal of dentistry, 41(8), 695-702.
Karakuyu, H. (2017). Bulk-Fill Kompozi̇t Rezi̇nler İle Geleneksel Kompozi̇t Rezi̇nleri̇n Kli̇ni̇k Olarak Karşılaştırılması. Kocaeli Üniversitesi,
Karaman, E., Keskin, B., & Inan, U. (2017). Three-year clinical evaluation of class II posterior composite restorations placed with different techniques and flowable composite linings in endodontically treated teeth. Clinical oral investigations, 21(2), 709-716.
Mahant, R. H., Chokshi, S., Vaidya, R., Patel, P., Vora, A., & Mahant, P. (2016). Comparison of the amount of temperature rise in the pulp chamber of teeth treated with QTH, second and third generation LED light curing units: an in vitro study. Journal of lasers in medical sciences, 7(3), 184.
Pelissier, B., Jacquot, B., Palin, W. M., & Shortall, A. C. (2011). Three generations of LED lights and clinical implications for optimizing their use. 1: from past to present. Dental update, 38(10), 660-670.
Peutzfeldt, A., Mühlebach, S., Lussi, A., & Flury, S. (2018). Marginal gap formation in approximal “bulk fill” resin composite restorations after artificial ageing. Operative dentistry, 43(2), 180-189.
Prati, C., Chersoni, S., Montebugnoli, L., & Montanari, G. (1999). Effect of air, dentin and resin-based composite thickness on light intensity reduction. American Journal of Dentistry, 12(5), 231-234.
Rueggeberg, F. A., Caughman, W. F., Curtis, J. W., Jr., & Davis, H. C. (1993). Factors affecting cure at depths within light-activated resin composites. American Journal of Dentistry, 6(2), 91-95.
Santini, A. (2010). Current status of visible light activation units and the curing of light-activated resin-based composite materials. Dental update, 37(4), 214-227.
Santini, A., Gallegos, I., & Felix, C. Photoinitiators in Dentistry: A Review, Primary Dental Journal. 2 (2013) 30–33. In.
Sarrett, D. C. (2005). Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dental Materials, 21(1), 9-20.
Tarle, Z., Attin, T., Marovic, D., Andermatt, L., Ristic, M., & Tauböck, T. (2015). Influence of irradiation time on subsurface degree of conversion and microhardness of high-viscosity bulk-fill resin composites. Clinical oral investigations, 19(4), 831-840.
Van Dijken, J. W., & Pallesen, U. (2016). Posterior bulk-filled resin composite restorations: A 5-year randomized controlled clinical study. Journal of dentistry, 51, 29-35.
Van Ende, A., De Munck, J., Lise, D. P., & Van Meerbeek, B. (2017). Bulk-fill composites: a review of the current literature. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 19(2), 95-109.
Zaruba, M., Wegehaupt, F. J., & Attin, T. (2013). Comparison between different flow application techniques: SDR vs flowable composite. The Journal of Adhesive Dentistry, 15(2), 115-121.
