Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Molecular Structure

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/molstruc

Physico-mechanical and thermal characteristics of commercially

available and newly developed dental flowable composites
Hakan Kamalak a, *, C. Aksu Canbay b, Oktay Yig

it c, Serdar Altin d
a
Firat University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Elazig, Turkey
b
Firat University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Elazig, Turkey
c
Firat University, Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, Elazig, Turkey
d
Inonu University, Faculty of Arts & Science, Department of Physics, Malatya, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this study, we investigated the structural stability, thermal conductivity, thermal analysis, materials'
Received 13 September 2017 homogeneity of newly developed flowable composites. 6 different dental flowable composite resins;
Received in revised form Grandio Flow (GF), Charisma Flow (CF), Tetric N Flow (TNF), Clearfil Majesty Flow (CMF),3M Filtek Ul-
24 October 2017
timate Flow (3MFU), Voco Amaris Flow (VFA) were used. Restorations were made in standard teflon
Accepted 16 November 2017
Available online 17 November 2017
molds and the materials were light-cured for 20s in a 6 mm  2 mm teflon mould. After polymerization,
samples were kept in distilled water at 37  C/24 h .It was found that the composites have multiphase
component such as metallic dopant and organic binder. The XRD investigation showed that there was a
Keywords:
FTIR
broad halo in the pattern which indicates the organic section in the composites. The FTIR results indicate
SEM-EDX the bond structure of the composites. The temperature dependence of the thermal conductivity of the
Micro-hardness composites were found below to 5 mW/K value depending on the type of the composites, which are low
Porosity enough for dental application. The micro-hardness of the samples was analyzed and the result was
Flowable composites compared.
© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction composites [11e13].

Restorative dentistry is experiencing a dynamic transition in
developing adhesive technology [1]. A category of composite sys-
tems known as flowable composites has become an integral part of
the restorative process [2e4]. These restorative materials can be
used in a variety of clinical applications such as small carious le-
sions, pit and fissure sealants, liners, crown cementation, and other
adhesive restorative procedures [4e6].
Flowable composite restorations have become a routine and
well-founded procedure in dental practices with their greater
fluidity [7e9]. Since the flowable composites are compatible,
consistent and easy to manipulate, their clinical use is quite high.
New generation flowable composite resins, with their increased
filler ratios, could also be used as permanent restoration material
due to their increasing physical [10] and mechanical specifications.
Producers specified that newly developed nano-particle compos-
ites could be utilized in thick layers, similarly with the traditional
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: hakankamalak@hotmail.com (H. Kamalak).
Clinicians could choose from composites with a wide range of
viscosities for different clinical applications, from the flowable,
microfill and hybrid composite formulations, to the high-viscosity
packable posterior composites. Each category has certain advan-
tages and limitations [11,14,15].
Flowable composites and their restorations in a dynamic envi-
ronment of the mouth are affected negatively from heat, pH
changes and different force concentrations. Restorative materials to
be used should not be affected by these negativities, it should be
able to restore lost chewing function, phonation and aesthetics.
Also, Composite can enhance osteoblastic adhesion and differen-
tiation [16e18]. For this reason, developments regarding restor-
ative materials are continuing [14,19,20].
Advantages and disadvantages of flowable composites should be
well known by clinicians since these properties will directly affect
the selection of restorative materials.
Although the physical and mechanical properties of some
flowable composites have been tested, there is still insufficient
information; therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare
physical, mechanical and surface properties of 6 flowable resin
composites. Structural stability, thermal conductivity, thermal

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molstruc.2017.11.072
0022-2860/© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 H. Kamalak et al. / Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319 315

analysis [21], materials' homogeneity, XRD elemental analysis, FTIR
analysis [22], EDX analysis, surface porosity and Vickers micro-
hardness were measured. Their inorganic fraction was also char-
acterized. The inorganic fraction was analyzed using scanning-
electron microscopy (SEM).
2. Experimental
Specimens of the six resin composites were prepared in re-
usable custom-made Teflon molds (split Teflon molds with an in-
ner diameter of 6 mm and a height of 2 mm). Each composite was
placed into the standard molds in 1-mm increments by use of
prefilled syringes provided by the manufacturers. The composite
resin increment was covered with a clear polyester matrix strip and
a 1-mm-thick glass slide, which was gently pressed under a load of
200 gf during 1 min. Each increment was light-polymerized for 20 s
following manufacturers' specifications with a visible light poly-
merization unit (Woodpecker; Dental Wireless LED Curing Light
Lamp, USA) with an output of 1400 mW/cm2 and a wavelength
between 420 and 480 nm [23]. The cylindrical blocks were there-
after removed from the teflon molds, thus providing a cylinder with
the same dimensions of the bisected cavity (6 mm diameter; 2 mm
height). Lots of materials were fabricated and stored in a lightproof
receptacle with distilled water at 37  C. The number of samples is
described in detail below for each analysis group (Table 1).
The structural properties of the materials were performed by
XRD pattern using CuK radiation between 2 and 80 and Rad-B
Dmaxdiffractometer. The phases in the materials were analyzed
by using Jade 4.0. The micro-structural characterization was per-
formed with Scanning electron microscope (SEM, Leo EVO- 40 VPX)
with combined EDX unit (Bruker X flash detector 4010). FTIR
Spectra were performed by using Perkin Elmer FTIR analysis system
using KBr.
Optical microscope photographs of the samples were taken with
LeicaDM4000M microscope with 500x magnification. Vickers
hardness was measured on the surface in contact with the stainless
steel sheet using a micro-indentation tester (Emco Test Durascan)
with a 100N load applied during 45 s at two moments: 20 min and
24 h after light curing. The specimens were individually fixed in a
holder and positioned in such a way that the test surface was kept
perpendicular to the indentator tip. Measurements were made at
the top surface of the samples. 3 measurements were taken from
the surface of each cylindrical sample to minimize errors in mea-
surements. Averages of 3 measurements were calculated. As a
result 5 measurements were taken from each group. For all tested
materials, microhardness means were calculated. Measurements
were made at the top surface of the sample and three different
measurements were taken from the surface of each cylindrical
sample for minimization of the errors in measurements.
The heat conductivity of the samples was analyzed by the home
made thermal conductivity measurement system. We used two
brass blocks which the first base has a heater inside it and the
second is the heat sink and both of them have k-type thermocouple
inserted the surface of the blocks. We calibrated the system using Al
(alfa aesar cas no:7429-90-5 which have thermal conductivity
value 205 W/Km) [24]. It was used 120 W power to obtain tem-
perature gradient in both side with PID temperature controller to
reach 55  C temperature which is the highest temperature that can
be applied without decomposition of the biomaterials.
3. Results and discussion
The XRD pattern of the samples were given in Fig. 1 and it is
easily seen from the XRD pattern that there are two different
phases in the structure which the first one is the organic binder
such as bisphenol-A-glycidyl methacrylate that gives a broad halo
in the XRD pattern between 20 and 30 and the second is the
inorganic materials which give the peaks in the XRD pattern such as
seen in the Fig. 1. The samples named as 3MFU, TF and GF were
showed the characteristic peaks of Ca3(SiO3)(OH)2, SiO2 and
Al2(SiO4)O as indicated in the Fig. 1. It was not observed any peaks
in the XRD pattern of the samples named as VAF, CF and CMF that
the inorganic filler has a minor phase in the structure which may be
below of the detection limit of the XRD system. It can be concluded
that the chemical phases and compositions of the composites were
changed from one to another composites.
Marina et al. [25] expressed in their study that carbon and ox-
ygen were prepolymerized fillers which represent powder of
polymerized resin incorporated to the two composites tested. Ox-
ygen from silicon dioxide or colloidal silica particles and carbon
from sputter-coating could also been detected. In our study EDX
analysis detected aluminum, silicon, ytterbium, fluorine, and cal-
cium in the samples of composites. The elements aluminum, sili-
con, oxygen and calcium are constituents of the resin monomers

Table 1
Chemical composition of flowable composites.

Material Manufacturer Material Type Matrix type Filler Content Filler Abbreviation
Name Ratio wt
[%]

Amaris flow VOCO, Cuxhaven, Flowable BisGMA, BISEMA, Zirconia, Silica Particles, Iterium Trifluoride, 75 VAF
Germany composite UDMA and Procrylat
Charisma VOCO, Cuxhaven, Hybrid Flowable Multifunctional Ba-Al-Fe and SiO2 Silicate Glass Filler 62 CF
Flow Germany Composite Methacrylate
Monomers
EBADMA TEDGMA
Clearfil Kuraray Universal TEGDMA Barium Glass 81 CMF
Majesty Japan Flowable Hydrophobic Aromatic Colloidal Silica
Composite Dimethacrylate
Grandio VOCO, Cuxhaven, Nanohibrid Bis - EMA Silicate oxide, Silicate Glass pigment, Stabilizer 80.2 GF
Flow Germany Flowable TEGDMA
Composite HEDMA
Modified Organic
Matrix
Tetric- N Ivoclar Vivadent Austria Flowable Dimethacrylate resinBarium Glass particles, The prepolymer Itanium trifluoride, 75e77 TF
Flow (Newly produced) composite Mixed oxides
Filtek™ 3M/ESPE USA Flowable Bis-GMA, UDMA, Silica filler, non-agglomerated/non-aggregated 4e11 nm 72,5 3MFU
Ultimate composite TEGDMA, and bis-EMA zirconia filler, and aggregated zirconia/silica
Flow
316 H. Kamalak et al. / Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319

Fig. 3. DTA of the composites named as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris flow
Fig. 1. XRD pattern of the composites named as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris
(VAF), (c) Charisma Flow CF, (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and (f)
flow (VAF), (c) Charisma Flow CF, (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and
Grandio flow (GF).
(f) Grandio flow (GF).

used in all composite resins. Moreover, the samples were showed

the characteristic peaks of Ca3(SiO3)(OH)2, SiO2 and Al2(SiO4)O.
The bond structures of the composites were investigated by FTIR
spectra as seen in Fig. 2. It is well known that the composites in
dental research have BisGMA, UDMA and TEGDMA organic binder
which consist of C, H, N and O ions in the structures. The bands
between 3428 and 3481 are related to O-H vibration modes in the
structure as seen in Ref. [24]. It was observed C-H stretching bands
at 2915e2964 and C-O-C modes were found at 1068 cm 1. The
other bands at 1408, 1621 and 1728 were corresponded to (CO3)2,
NH-CO and C]O stretching modes of the ions in the composites.
TG/DTA measurements were performed for all composites in
order to observe the thermal stability of the samples and given in
Figs. 3e4. As seen in Fig. 3, the DTA curve for CF and TF indicates
two exothermic peaks accompanied by the effect of carbonate
group and the DTA curves of the samples 3MFU, VAF, CMF and GF
samples indicate one exothermic peak. The TG analysis results are Fig. 4. TG of the composites named as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris flow
given in Fig. 4, between 100  C and 900  C. The 3MFU, VAF, CF, CMF (VAF), (c) Charisma Flow CF, (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and (f)
Grandio flow (GF).
and TF samples indicates endothermic peaks and the mass loss
occurred for these samples can be attributed to the organic
component of the samples. When we compare the thermal decomposition temperature nearly about 300  C, and also, 3MFU
decomposition temperatures of these samples, GF has the lowest has the highest decomposition temperature nearly about 500  C.
The TG curves indicate that all the mass loss of the samples are
between 280 and 600  C which can be explained by the decom-
position of the organic content of these materials.
Petrine et al. researched that [26] differential thermal analysis
and thermogravimetry (TGeDTA) of biomimetic ceramic/polymer
composite materials. They found only the weight loss, which
occurred until 450  C. In our study we found that all the mass loss of
the samples are between 280 and 600  C which can be explained by
the decomposition of the organic content of these materials.
The optical surface photographs of the composites which named
as 3MFU, TF, GF, VAF, CF and CMF were given in the Fig. 5a-f. It was
observed three phase regions in the surface of 3MFU sample and it
was concluded that inhomogeneous distribution of the phases
which can cause the change of the mechanical and thermal prop-
erties of the samples. The composites named as VAF, CF, TF and GJ
showed similar structure with each other as seen in the Fig. 5 and
the needle-like grain formation is the general structure of these
composites.
Fig. 2. FTIR spectra of the composites named as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris
The SEM images of the composites named as 3MFU, VAF, CF,
flow (VAF), (c) Charisma Flow (CF), (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and CMF, TF and GF were given in the Fig. 6a-f. While the grain size of
(f) Grandio flow (GF). 3MFU composite is above 5 mm and the grains were joined with
 H. Kamalak et al. / Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319
Fig. 5. Optical microscope photographs of the composites named as (a) Filtek ultimate
(3MFU), (b) Amaris flow (VAF), (c) Charisma Flow (CF), (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e)
Tetrik N flow (TF) and (f) Grandio flow (GF).
others, it was observed nano-sized grain formation for the sample
named as VAF, CF, CMF, TF and GF. It is well known that nano-sized
samples have better properties when compared the others as
stated in Ref. [27] which is expected properties of the dental
composites [28,29].
It is well known that the mechanical properties of the dental
composite resins are one of the important subjects for clinic
application [39]. The micro-hardness values of the composites were
calculated by taking the average hardness of composites [30]. The
experimentally obtained micro-hardness values of the composites
were given in Table 2. While the lowest hardness value was
observed in the composite named CF, the highest value of the
micro-hardness were found as 61.02 Hv for VAF.
It is well known that the particles in the composite with strong
bounds can cause the increase of the mechanical strength. It is well
known that the chemical bond between the resin matrix and filler
has directly affected the mechanical strength of the composites
[31]. In addition of this, larger particles in the structure have less
mechanical properties when compared the others [24,32]. So the
micro-hardness value of the composites may be related to grain
size and bonding of the components in the structure.
Multiple components mixed to provide better performance,
composites are expected to provide desired mechanical stability,
improve tissue integration [33]. Jeong et al. [34]. in their study
evaluating the microhardness of flowable composite resins, the
microhardness of GF and TNF were found to be 50.8 ± 3.1 Hv and
33.6 ± 1.1 Hv, respectively. In our study, we observed that micro-
hardness of GF was 36.20 ± 3.79 Hv and TNF was 35.62 ± 3.96 Hv.
The microhardness consequence of TNF is showing similarity with
317
Fig. 6. SEM images of samples named as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris flow
(VAF), (c) Charisma Flow (CF), (d) Clearfil majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and (f)
Grandio flow (GF).
research described by Jeong et al. Moreover, The result of GF was
found to be lower.
Topçu et al. [35]. found microhardness of CMF and 3MFU as
88.30 ± 3.40 Hv and 77.46 ± 2.23 Hv, respectively. In our work, CMF
and 3MFU microhardness found 60.40 ± 4.75 Hv and 49.46 ± 5.52
Hv respectively. The differences in the results can be influenced by
the polymerization time of materials, condensation and micro-
hardness measurement device.
The obtained microhardness results should be similar to
microhardness of human dentin teeth and the results of micro-
hardness of human dentin teeth were found to be between 30 and
55.5 Hv [36]. In our study, microhardness values were found be-
tween 28 and 75 Hv. We observed that the microhardness results of
CF were much lower than the dentin hardness and clinical use of CF
would not be effective.
Condon et al. [37,38] expressed in their study that Porosity in an
admixed two-component material reduces the shrinkage stress,
since the non-bonded surface area is enlarged. Porosity in the
restorative presents the disadvantage of weakening the material
and resulting in discoloration of the surface. In our study we
observed that optical microscope images showed 3MFU and that
CMF had more pyrolysis. When we looked at the physical proper-
ties of these materials, we observed microhardness value of
49.46 ± 5.52 at 3MFU and 60.40 ± 4.75 at CMF. In addition, while
the micropores of the TF having less surface porosity should have
higher microhardness, we have observed that it is less. The results
we achieved in our does not support the work done by Condon et al.
Thus, we may think that surface purosis does not affect all physical
properties of dental materials.
318 H. Kamalak et al. / Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319
Table 2
Micro-hardness of the composites at room temperature.
Sample name Microhardness [Hv]
Filtek™ Ultimate Flow 49.46 ± 5.52
Amaris flow 61.02 ± 14.34
Tetric- N Flow 35.62 ± 3.96
Clearfil Majesty 60.40 ± 4.75
Charisma Flow 25.52 ± 3.52
Grandio Flow 36.20 ± 3.79
Thermal conductivity of the dental composites is one of the
important subjects for clinical treatment [24,39e41]. It is well
known that the thermal conductivity can be calculated by the
temperature gradient of the sampled for a certain distance which
the detail can be found in Ref. [24]. The temperature dependence of
the thermal conductivity of the dental composites are given in the
Fig. 7 and it is found that all composites at the room temperature
have a values which below 3 mW/K and they were decreased with
increasing temperature. the thermal conductivity measurements of
the composites can be investigated in two part such as below 60 0C
and above 60 0C. It can be said that the lowest thermal conductivity
was obtained for the sample of CMF and the highest value belongs
to 3MFU for lower temperature of 60 0C. In the second part of
thermal conductivity measurements, it was found that the lowest
thermal conductivity value was obtained for the sample of CF and
the highest value is obtained for the sample of VAF.
A old study has shown that a pulp temperature increase of 5.5  C
and 11.1  C in monkeys caused 60% irreversible pulpitis [42].
Therefore, a temperature increase of 5.5  C during the dental res-
torations has been regarded as the temperature threshold to avoid
pulp inflammations. A recent study about the temperature increase
in teeth showed that a temperature increase of 11.2  C does not
damage the pulp [43]. Another research on living dental pulp [44]
showed that when the temperature was kept at 46e50  C for 30 s,
stasis and thrombosis developed leading to a standstill of circula-
tion. Therefore, the real value of the critical temperature that causes
pulpal damage is controversial, but it can be concluded that the
pulp temperature should be kept as low as possible during the
composite setting to avoid any risk of harming the pulp. In our work
we have observed that CMF has low thermal conductivity and CF
and VAF have high thermal conductivity. Thus, due to the high
thermal conductivity of the teeth restored with CF and VAF, it is not
Fig. 7. Temperature dependence of the thermal conductivity of the composites named
as (a) Filtek ultimate (3MFU), (b) Amaris flow (VAF), (c) Charisma Flow (CF), (d) Clearfil
majesty (CMF), (e) Tetrik N flow (TF) and (f) Grandio flow (GF).
possible to preserve the health of the dental pulp in the long term,
especially in the restoration of deeply rotting teeth.
4. Conclusions
In this study, the structural, thermal and mechanical properties
of the dental composites were investigated in detail. It should be
noted that the composites consist of organic phase and crystalline
phase as indicated in the XRD section. It can be said that the
crystalline phase in the composites are a crucial role on the me-
chanical and thermal properties of the structure since organic part
has a similar properties. It is found from the FTIR analysis that the
bond structure of the composites has similar structure. The TG/DTA
measurements showed that the thermal stability of the samples are
in agreement with literature. The endothermic and exothermic
peaks observed in thermal measurements can be explained by the
carbonate content and also the decomposition of the samples. The
surface investigation of the composites showed that needle-like
grains are the main structure of the surface. Most of the grains
have nano-size in the composites which is expected behavior for
dental materials. The lowest micro-hardness value were obtained
for the composite of CF such as 25.52 Hv. It was found that the
thermal conductivity of the composites was decreased with
increasing temperature which is expected behavior for clinical
applications.
Acknowledgement
This study was performed under the project provided by Inonu
University research council under contract number 2015-48. We
would like to thank Erdinc OZ for performing the thermal con-
ductivity measurements during to study.
References
[1] V.T. Perchyonok, S. Zhang, N.J. Basson, S.R. Grobler, Evaluation of tetracycline
containing chitosan hydrogels as potential dual action bio-active restorative
materials capable of wound healing: in vitro approach, Biointerface Res. Appl.
Chem. 4 (5) (2014).
[2] C. Behle, Flowable composites: properties and applications, Pract. Periodontics
Aesthet. Dent. PPAD 10 (3) (1998) 350e351, 347.
[3] S.C. Bayne, J.Y. Thompson, E.J. Swift Jr., P. Stamatiades, M. Wilkerson,
A characterization of first-generation flowable composites, J. Am. Dent. Assoc.
129 (5) (1998) 567e577.
[4] E.D. Bonilla, M. Yashar, A.A. Caputo, Fracture toughness of nine flowable resin
composites, J. Prosthet. Dent. 89 (3) (2003) 261e267.
[5] Z. Tarle, A. Knezevic, N. Demoli, A. Meniga, J. Sutaloa, G. Unterbrink, M. Ristic,
G. Pichler, Comparison of composite curing parameters: effects of light source
and curing mode on conversion, temperature rise and polymerization
shrinkage, Oper. Dent. 31 (2) (2006) 219e226.
[6] M. Braem, W. Finger, V. Van Doren, P. Lambrechts, G. Vanherle, Mechanical
properties and filler fraction of dental composites, Dent. Mater. 5 (5) (1989)
346e349.
[7] G.J. Christensen, Amalgam vs. composite resin: 1998, J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 129
(12) (1998) 1757e1759.
[8] M. Miyazaki, H. Onose, B.K. Moore, Effect of operator variability on dentin
bond strength of two-step bonding systems, Am. J. Dent. 13 (2) (2000)
101e104.
[9] S.C. Bayne, J.Y. Thompson, E.J. Swift, P. Stamatiades, M. Wilkerson,
A characterization of first-generation flowable composites, J. Am. Dent. Assoc.
129 (5) (1998) 567e577.
[10] S. Misri, M.R. Ishak, M.S. Salit, Z. Leman, Mechanical and physical performance
of filament wound kenaf/unsaturated polyester composites, Biointerface Res.
Appl. Chem. 6 (6) (2016).
[11] I. Ikeda, M. Otsuki, A. Sadr, T. Nomura, R. Kishikawa, J. Tagami, Effect of filler
content of flowable composites on resin-cavity interface, Dent. Mater. J. 28 (6)
(2009) 679e685.
[12] J.L. Ferracane, Resin compositedstate of the art, Dent. Mater. 27 (1) (2011)
29e38.
[13] R. Schnause, Manufacture of flowable composite particulate material, Google
Patents, 1981.
[14] R. Frankenberger, M. Lopes, J. Perdiga ~o, W.W. Ambrose, B.T. Rosa, The use of
flowable composites as filled adhesives, Dent. Mater. 18 (3) (2002) 227e238.
[15] G.L. Unterbrink, W.H. Liebenberg, Flowable resin composites as" filled
 H. Kamalak et al. / Journal of Molecular Structure 1156 (2018) 314e319
adhesives": literature review and clinical recommendations, Quintessence Int.
30 (4) (1999).
[16] D.R. Bienek, D. Skrtic, Utility of amorphous calcium phosphate-based scaffolds
in dental/biomedical applications, Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 7 (1) (2017)
1989e1994.
[17] R. Zhou, W. Xu, F. Chen, C. Qi, B.Q. Lu, H. Zhang, J. Wu, Q.R. Qian, Y.J. Zhu,
Amorphous calcium phosphate nanospheres/polylactide composite coated
tantalum scaffold: facile preparation, fast biomineralization and subchondral
bone defect repair application, Colloid Surf. B 123 (2014) 236e245.
[18] A. Oyane, H. Araki, M. Nakamura, Y. Shimizu, Q.T.H. Shubhra, A. Ito,
H. Tsurushima, Controlled superficial assembly of DNA-amorphous calcium
phosphate nanocomposite spheres for surface-mediated gene delivery,
Colloid Surf. B 141 (2016) 519e527.
[19] J. Manhart, R. Hickel, Esthetic compomer restorations in posterior teeth using
a new all-in-one adhesive: case presentation, J. Esthetic Dent. 11 (5) (1999)
250e258.
[20] N. Moszner, U. Salz, New developments of polymeric dental composites, Prog.
Polym. Sci. 26 (4) (2001) 535e576.
[21] C.M.C. Aron, C. Adenilda, F. Honorio, L.F. Eduardo, Rheology analysis can be
added in thermal stability test for design microemulsion materials, Bio-
interface Res. Appl. Chem. 6 (2) (2016) 1128e1136.
[22] P.M. Anand, P. Hershita, R.K. J., Microwave synthesis, spectral, thermal and
antimicrobial activities of Co(II), Ni(II) and Cu(II) metal complexes with Schiff
base ligand, Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 2 (2) (2012) 291e299.
[23] H. Kamalak, S. Demirel, E. Oz, S. Altin, The leakage study between restorative
and pulp capping materials and diffusion analysis by Fick laws, Biointerface
Res. Appl. Chem. 6 (1) (2016).
[24] H. Kamalak, E. Oz, S. Demirel, S. Altin, The mechanical and heat conducting
properties of dental composites, Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 6 (6) (2016).
[25] M. Di Francescantonio, R. Rocha Pacheco, T. Rodrigues Aguiar, C. Boaro,
L. Cristina, R. Ruggiero Braga, A. Luis Martins, M. Giannini, Evaluation of
composition and morphology of filler particles in low-shrinkage and con-
ventional composite resins carried out by means of SEM and EDX, J. Clin. Dent.
Res. 13 (1) (2016).
[26] M. Petrini, M. Ferrante, B. Su, Fabrication and characterization of biomimetic
ceramic/polymer composite materials for dental restoration, Dent. Mater. 29
(4) (2013) 375e381.
[27] N. Moszner, S. Klapdohr, Nanotechnology for dental composites, Int. J.
Nanotechnol. 1 (1e2) (2004) 130e156.
[28] X. Zhang, B.U. Kolb, D.A. Hanggi, S.B. Mitra, P.D.N. Ario, R.P. Rusin, Radiopaque
dental materials with nano-sized particles, Google Patents, 2002.
319
[29] K.K. Choi, J.L. Ferracane, T.J. Hilton, D. Charlton, Properties of packable dental
composites, J. Esthetic Restor. Dent. 12 (4) (2000) 216e226.
[30] H. Kamalak, In vitro comparison of microhardness of bulk fill flowable com-
posites, Med. Clin. Rev. 2 (12) (2015).
[31] S. Sahu, L. Broutman, Mechanical properties of particulate composites, Polym.
Eng. Sci. 12 (2) (1972) 91e100.
[32] Z. Spitalsky, D. Tasis, K. Papagelis, C. Galiotis, Carbon nanotubeepolymer
composites: chemistry, processing, mechanical and electrical properties, Prog.
Polym. Sci. 35 (3) (2010) 357e401.
[33] A. Ramedani, Y. Hatefi, M. Mozafari, Controlled delivery of cefixime trihydrate
from organic-inorganic nanofiber composites, Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 6
(3) (2016).
[34] C.M. Jeong, Y.J. Heo, Y.C. Jeon, H.I. Kim, Y.H. Kwon, Microhardness and poly-
merization shrinkage of flowable resins that are light cured using a blue laser,
Lasers Med. Sci. 27 (4) (2012) 729e733.
[35] F.T. Topcu, U. Erdemir, G. Sahinkesen, E. Yildiz, I. Uslan, C. Acikel, Evaluation of
microhardness, surface roughness, and wear behavior of different types of
resin composites polymerized with two different light sources, J. Biomed.
Mater. Res. B 92B (2) (2010) 470e478.
[36] S. Khedmat, A. Hashemi, F. Dibaji, M.J. Kharrazifard, Effect of chloroform,
eucalyptol and orange oil solvents on the microhardness of human root
dentin, J. Dent. 12 (1) (2015) 25e30.
[37] J.R. Condon, J.L. Ferracane, Reduction of composite contraction stress through
non-bonded microfiller particles, Dent. Mater. 14 (4) (1998) 256e260.
[38] J.R. Condon, J.L. Ferracane, Reduction of composite contraction stress through
non-bonded microfiller particles, J. Dent. Res. 77 (1998) 190, 190.
[39] R. Yang, G. Chen, Thermal conductivity modeling of periodic two-dimensional
nanocomposites, Phys. Rev. B 69 (19) (2004), 195316.
[40] M. Gale, B. Darvell, Thermal cycling procedures for laboratory testing of dental
restorations, J. Dent. 27 (2) (1999) 89e99.
[41] C. Zweben, Advances in composite materials for thermal management in
electronic packaging, JOM J. Miner. Metals Mater. Soc. 50 (6) (1998) 47e51.
[42] L. Zach, G. Cohen, Pulp response to externally applied heat, Oral Surg. Oral
Med. Oral Pathol. 19 (1965) 515e530.
[43] P. Baldissara, S. Catapano, R. Scotti, Clinical and histological evaluation of
thermal injury thresholds in human teeth: a preliminary study, J. Oral Rehabil.
24 (11) (1997) 791e801.
[44] M. Pohto, A. Scheinin, Microscopic observations on living dental pulp I.
Method for intravital study of circulation in rat incisor pulp, Acta Odontol.
Scand. 16 (3) (1958) 303e314.