Fracture resistance of pulpotomized and composite-restored primary molars: Incremental versus bulk-fill techniques

• Published in: Dental research journal Vol. 17; no. 6; pp. 412 - 416
• Main Authors: Ghajari, Masoud, Ghasemi, Amir, Moradi, Arash, Sanjari, Khashayar
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Iran Wolters Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd 01-11-2020; Medknow Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd; Wolters Kluwer - Medknow; Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
• Subjects: bulk-fill composite; Childrens health; conventional composite; Dental caries; Dental cement; Dental pulp; Endodontics; fracture resistance; Fractures; Impact strength; Molars; Original; primary molar; pulpotomy; Statistical analysis; Teeth; Bulk-fill composite; pulpotomy; conventional composite; fracture resistance; primary molar
• ISSN: 1735-3327; 2008-0255
• DOI: 10.4103/1735-3327.302889

Background: The aim of this study was to assess the fracture resistance of pulpotomized primary molars restored with incremental and bulk-fill composite application techniques.
Materials and Methods: In this in-vitro experimental study, 36 extracted primary molars were nonrandomly (selectively) divided into three groups of 12 each. All teeth underwent conventional pulpotomy treatment, and mesio-occluso-distal cavities were prepared in such a way that the buccolingual width of the preparation was two-thirds of the intercuspal distance, and the depth of the buccal and lingual walls was 4 mm. The teeth were then restored as follows: Group 1 (control) was restored with amalgam, Group 2 was restored with Tetric N-Ceram composite using the incremental technique, and Group 3 was restored with Tetric N-Ceram composite using the bulk-fill technique. The restored teeth were subjected to thermocycling and then underwent fracture resistance testing in a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. Fracture resistance of groups was compared using the one-way ANOVA and Tukey's honestly significant difference test.
Results: The mean fracture resistance was 1291.47 ± 603.88 N in the amalgam, 1283.08 ± 594.57 N in the Tetric N-Ceram incremental, and 1939.06 ± 134.47 N in the Tetric N-Ceram bulk-fill group. The difference in this regard between Group 3 and Groups 1 and 2 was statistically significant (P = 0.019 and P= 0.035, respectively).
Conclusion: Bulk-fill composite is recommended for reinforcing the remaining tooth structure after the primary molar pulpotomy procedure. Time-saving characteristics of this material are clinically important for reducing appointment time for children.