Comparison of shear bond strength and microleakage between activa™ bioactive restorative™ and bulk-fill composites—an In vitro study

Abstract

Bioactive materials have emerged as a promising alternative to conventional restorative materials as part of more conservative dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the shear bond strength (SBS) and microleakage of a new bioactive restorative material, two bulk-fill restorative composites, and a conventional composite at 24 h, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks. Three hundred and sixty molars and premolars were divided into four groups: ACTIVA™ BioACTIVE Restorative™, Filtek™ Bulk-Fill Restorative Composite, Tetric® N-Ceram Bulk-Fill Composite, and G-aenial® Composite. The normality of the data was determined with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, then the two-way ANOVA and Fisher’s test were used for analyzing SBS data, and the Kruskal-Wallis and DSCF tests were conducted to analyze the microleakage. In the SBS test, there were no statistically significant differences between materials (p = 0.587), and the relation between material and time (p = 0.467), time points showed statistically significant differences (p = 0.016). As for the microleakage, statistically significant differences were found for all three time periods (p < 0.05), showing the conventional composite to have the lowest microleakage, followed by the bioactive material, and lastly the two bulk-fill composites. In conclusion, the new bioactive material has similar evaluated properties to bulk-fill composites (bond strength) and conventional composites (bond strength and microleakage) and can be used as an alternative restorative material.