Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Selcuk Dental Journal, cilt.12, sa.2, ss.202-207, 2025 (Scopus)
Aim: This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the degree of conversion, and to compare the flexural strength, and microhardness of two flowable resin composites with different filler ratio. Materials & Methods: Two flowable composite resins were used in this study, ZENIFLOW (65% filler by volume) and Dynamic flow (60% filler by volume) (President, Germany). Disc-shaped specimens were prepared from each material using silicone molds (8 x 2). All specimens were polymerized with an LED curing unit (Valo Cordless, Ultradent, USA) at 1000 mW/cm2 for 20 s. Polishing procedures were performed with 4-stage finishing discs (BISCO, USA). Vickers microhardness values (VHN) (n=5) and hardness ratio (HR) of these samples were determined from the top/bottom surfaces with a microhardness tester after being stored in distilled water at 37ºC for 15 days. Degree of conversion (DC) was evaluated using Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) (n=5). Rectangular specimens (25 x 2 x 2) were prepared and subjected to three-point bending test (n=10) to determine flexural strength (FS) and flexural modulus (FM). After the flexural strength evaluation, the fractured surfaces were examined by stereomicroscope (Leica MZ7.5, Germany) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) (Zeiss EVO MA10, Germany). Independent sample t-test was used to compare the values between groups. The significance level was determined as p<0.05. Results: There was no significant difference between the two resin composites with different filler ratios in terms of degree of conversion, microhardness, hardness ratio, flexural strength, and flexural modulus. Conclusion: A 5% increase in the volume of filler content did not alter the degree of conversion and the tested mechanical properties of the resin composite.