Assessment of compressive and flexural properties of three contemporary bulk fill resin composites

Borja-Farfán N.; Loyola-Livias D.; Casas-Apayco L.; Hermoza-Novoa M. · Acta Odontologica Latinoamericana (2025) · DOI: 10.54589/aol.38/3/237

Resumen

Contemporary restorative materials must demonstrate how much stress they can withstand before permanently deforming under the constant forces generated during chewing. Aim: To compare the compressive and flexural strength of three bulk fill resin composites. Materials and Method: This study analyzed three bulk fill resin composites: Opus™ bulk fill (OBF), Tetric® N-Ceram bulk fill (TNC), and Filtek™ bulk fill (FBF), and one conventional resin composite: Filtek™ Z350XT (FZXT) as a control group. Each composite was used to prepare 14 cylindrical specimens (n=56) for compressive strength tests, and 19 rectangular specimens (n=76) for flexural strength tests. Mechanical tests were performed using an Instron® universal testing machine-100 kN load at a speed of 1 mm/1min. Results: Descriptive (Mean ± SD) and inferential statistics (Kruskal-Wallis test/post-hoc test), p<0.05 were used. The compressive test results (Means ± SD) were: OBF (141.68MPa ± 22.20), TNC (139.03MPa ± 23.56), FBF (235.59MPa ± 26.08), and FZXT (99.28MPa ± 11.36). The flexural test results (Means ± SD) were: OBF (116.29 ± 7.20), TNCBF (109.67MPa ± 7.58), FBF (200.53MPa ± 10.32), and FZXT (90.08MPa ± 8.63). Statistically significant differences were found between the resin composites (p<0.001) in both mechanical tests. Conclusion: The bulk fill resin composites demonstrated higher compressive and flexural strength than the conventional resin composite. However, the use of these restorative materials may depend on specific clinical requirements and material handling preferences.

Instituciones: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas