Comparison of SonicFillTM composite system with conventional bulk fill technique

Objectives: To compare voids created by SonicFill^TM composite system with a conventional system using bulk fill technique.

 

Methods: Forty standard Class II preparations were prepared on sound extracted human third molar teeth by the same operator using a #330 carbide bur. Preparations were approximately 2.0mm in depth at the occlusal floor and 4.0mm in depth at the gingival floor. Samples were randomly assigned into four groups (n=10). Two composite systems were tested:  Filtek Supreme Ultra (3M ESPE) was used for groups 1and 2, SonicFill (Kerr) for groups 3 and 4. Composite and recommended adhesive system were applied according to the manufacturers' instructions. To ensure the results were not affected by the operator, two operators were randomly assigned to restore the composite. All samples were cured for 40 seconds with LED light (DEMI, Kerr) and placed in an incubator at 37^oC for 24 hours to ensure complete polymerization of the materials. Samples were embedded into self curing acrylic resin and two consecutive cut sections were made in mesio-distal direction with a diamond wheel (Isomet, Buehler). Area of each void was measured with analyzer software. Total percentage of void was calculated based on the total area of voids on each section divided by the total area of the composite material. Statistical analysis was done by one-way ANOVA, with post-hoc analysis conducted via Fisher LSD. Significance was predetermined at p<0.05.

 

Results:

Group	Operator	Percentage of void
1	A	0.93±0.59a
2	B	0.97±0.55a
3	A	0.42±0.19b
4	B	0.34±0.21b

 

Conclusions: In terms of the total percentage of voids, there was a statistically significant difference between groups, with groups 3 and 4 yielding a lower percentage of voids compared with groups 1 and 2.