Dynamic Viscoelastic Characterization of Bulk-fill Resin-based Composites and Their Conventional Counterparts

This study compared the viscoelastic properties of restorative and flowable bulk-fill resin-based composites (RBCs) with their conventional counterparts and evaluated the impact of aqueous solutions on viscoelastic properties. The materials examined included three conventional RBCs (Filtek Z350, Tetric N Ceram, and Beautifil II), three restorative bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Restorative, Tetric N Ceram Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-Fill Restorative) in addition to three flowable bulk-fill RBCs (Filtek Bulk-Fill Flowable, Tetric N Flow Bulk-Fill, and Beautifil Bulk-Fill Flowable). Beam-shaped specimens (12×2×2 mm) were fabricated using customized stainless-steel molds, finished, and measured. The specimens were randomly divided into four groups and conditioned in air (control), artificial saliva, 0.02 N citric acid, and 50% ethanol-water solution for seven days at 37°C. They were then subjected to dynamic mechanical analysis (n = 10) in flexure mode at 37°C with a frequency of 0.1 to 10 Hz. Storage modulus, loss modulus, and loss tangent data were subjected to statistical analysis using one-way analysis of variance/Tukey post hoc test at a significance level of α = 0.05. Viscoelastic properties of the RBCs were found to be product and conditioning medium dependent. For most RBCs, exposure to aqueous solutions, particularly an ethanol-water solution, degraded viscoelastic properties. With the exception of Filtek Bulk-Fill Restorative, bulk-fill restorative and flowable RBCs generally had significantly lower storage and loss modulus than their conventional counterparts regardless of conditioning medium. Conventional RBCs are thus favored over their bulk-fill counterparts, particularly for high-stress-bearing areas.