29115 745 758 - REALITY Publishing Company · 1. Renamel Microfill Cosmedent 2. Heliomolar Ivoclar Vivadent 3. Durafill VS Heraeus Kulzer REALITY’S CHOICES Microfills ©2005 REALITY

1. Renamel MicrofillCosmedent

2. Heliomolar Ivoclar Vivadent

3. Durafill VSHeraeus Kulzer

REALITY’S CHOICESMicrofills

©2005 REALITY Publishing Co. Vol. 19 The Ratings 745

Microfills

©2005 REALITY Publishing Co. Vol. 19746 The Ratings

Cost/g

Renamel Microfill

Cosmedent

Kit Refills Vita Incisal IncisalMisc.Product

$14.20–$16.24

$15.74–$16.24

16 4 11 70

Shades

Weight

60 Syringes

Volume Delivery A2

22

Hardness(Knoop)

11.7

BondStrength

(MPa)

1.0

HeliomolarIvoclar Vivadent

$13.03–$13.13

$15.30–$20.45

8 0 2 77 64Syringes,

Tips37

2mm*: 16.73mm*: 14.44mm*: 9.5

0.5

Durafill VSHeraeus Kulzer

$14.49–$17.86

$17.86–$19.08

17 1 2 50.5 40Syringes,

Tips24 11.8

1.3 3.7

Porosity(% of voids)

1.0 1.4

4.53.71.25

Bleach

6

1

3

Working TimeUnder Dental Unit

Light (minutes)

Filler Load %

*Thickness of specimen 0%TRANSLUCENT

100%OPAQUE

1

Shade T/O Rating (%) 10 sec

5 minafter cur-

ing(40 sec)Product

A2B1

Body B ZeroLIMIDI

SB ILSB1SB2SB3BWLO

Gingafill Med.

68.068.070.129.635.038.629.670.068.369.370.767.773.6

2.6 2.6 3.4

Volumetric Shrinkage measured @ light-cured timesTranslucency/Opacity1

7 of 7

Match Shades ofNatural Teeth

Astropol,CompoMaster,

D♦Fine, D♦Fine Double Diamond,

Diacomp,FlexiCup,

Hawe HiLuster, Jiffy Cup,

Jiffy HiShine, PoGo


A2105420T110T

76.372.465.262.3

2.2 2.3 3.3

3 of 4(Formula)

2 of 4(No Formula)

Astropol, D♦Fine, D♦Fine Double Diamond,Diacomp, Hawe HiLuster,

Jiffy HiShine, Jiffy Polishing Cup


A2OA2

IncisalSLOB1SSLSL

54.874.036.167.060.472.168.4

1.7 1.8 2.7 6 of 6

Astropol, D♦Fine,

D♦Fine Double Diamond, Diacomp, FlexiCup,

Hawe HiLuster, Jiffy HiShine,

Jiffy Polishing Cup,PoGo

Best Polishers5 sec

Renamel Microfill

Cosmedent

Fluorescence (compared to natural tooth)

Renamel Microfill

Cosmedent

VeneerProduct

Close match


Slightlylighter


None,muchdarker

If there is one material that brought cosmetic dentistry intoprominence just about 25 years ago, microfills have to be on thetop of the list. They have allowed us to replace enamel with a sub-stitute that mimics it almost as well as porcelain, but also to keepthe control of the final restoration in our hands, rather than abdi-cating that artistry to the laboratory. Microfills are primarily usedas an enamel replacement in Class III, IV, and V restorations,diastema closures, and of course, hand-sculpted veneers.

Besides their ability to be polished easily to a high shine, micro-fills tend to resist wear due to abrasion very well. Microfills are stillthe most esthetic enamel replacement material, but polishablehybrids have definitely pushed the use of these materials into thehands of relatively few clinicians. Since they are more elastic thanhybrids, microfills have also been suggested as an ideal material forabfraction lesions due to their presumed ability to bend with atooth. Hybrids, being stiffer, would presumably be more likely todislodge from a Class V preparation if the tooth is under occlusalstress. However, this concept has yet to be demonstrated clinically.

TestsShade MatchingWe prepared Class V preparations in extracted natural teeth in thefollowing shades: A1, A2, A3, A3.5, B1, B3, and B4. Each mate-rial's corresponding Vita shades were then used to restore thesepreparations in the combination recommended by the manufac-turer. Some manufacturers suggest using a combination of dentinand enamel shades, while others may recommend mating a hybridwith a microfill. Bleach shades are also compared to B1.

We then determined by a consensus of at least three observers,each viewing the restored teeth under color-corrected light in aneutral gray box, if the material matched the teeth, was lighterthan the teeth, or was darker than the teeth.

Since these restorations were not bonded (to allow easy removalso the teeth could be reused), there were white lines around someof the restorations. With properly beveled preparations and adhe-sive application, these lines would not occur. Therefore, wediscounted these white lines when viewing the shades. Our resultsplus the photos of the restored teeth are presented in each prod-uct's commentary.

Shade GuideIf the material comes with a shade guide, we compared the A2 tabto the actual material and to the Vita A2.

Translucency/OpacityDiscs of selected body and opaque shades in 1.0mm thicknessesand incisal shades in 0.5mm thicknesses were measured for rela-tive degrees of translucency/opacity in a spectrophotometer. Thescale was 0-100, with 0 being totally clear and 100 being totallyopaque. Our findings are in each product's commentary.

Shade Shift after CuringThis test shows how much color change there is after light curingthe material. This is only important if you want to do a shadecheck without bothering to light cure the mockup. If the materi-al does not have a shade shift, you could do a mockup withoutlight curing. However, removing uncured material from a tooth

Microfills


Class V shade matching test using naturalteeth that match the Vita shade guide

A1

A2

A3

A3.5

B1

B3

B4

can be messy, so light curing is a good idea in any event. This shift,if any, was measured using the spectrophotometer.

Fluorescence This test shows how the material appears as a veneer in vivo underblack light. Materials exhibiting fluorescence that do not matchthat of natural teeth would not be a good choice in the mouth ofpatients with high esthetic needs.

PorosityThis test shows how well the material has been vacuum mixed bythe manufacturer to remove air from the final product. The high-er the percentage of porosity, the higher the probability you willhave voids present on the surface when you finish and polish thematerial. These voids are an annoyance and repairing them can betime-consuming as well as being an esthetic challenge.

Slump TestWe placed each product in a Class IV defect, with the toothangled as it would be if it was in a patient's mouth, with thepatient in a typical reclining position. After allowing 30 secondsto elapse, we cured the material and photographed any slumping.These photos are included in each product's commentary.

Depth of Cure (mm)This test will tell you the maximum thickness of each incrementof restorative material you can place, using hardness measure-ments in 1.0mm increments from the occlusal surface in theproximal box. The depth of cure limit is reached when the hard-ness value in the proximal box falls below the benchmark 80% ofthe occlusal surface hardness. This 80% hardness value is general-ly recognized as the standard to judge whether a composite hasbeen adequately cured, although we are unaware of any clinicalcorrelation with this value. Nevertheless, it is indisputable that thephysical properties of a restorative material will not be maximizedif a restoration is undercured. The test was done in a simulatedClass II preparation with the depth of the gingival wall 6mm fromthe tip of the light. Only Heliomolar was tested in this manner,since it is the only product in this category being marketed forposterior use.

Bond Strength (MPa) This test measures the differences in bond strength for all productsat 2mm and the products marketed for posterior use as the incre-ments increase in depth. Combined with the depth of curehardness results, it gives additional indication on how thick eachincrement of material can be.

Curing Time for Gingival Wall IncrementThis test will tell you if the increment of the product marketed forposterior use placed on the gingival wall of the proximal box hasachieved the benchmark 80% hardness value of the occlusal sur-face. The test is done in simulated Class II preparations with thedepth of the gingival wall 6mm from the tip of the light. The gin-gival increment is placed no thicker than 2mm.

Hardness (Knoop)Occlusal preparation was restored with the material, cured for 40seconds, and tested for hardness. This test is mainly for compara-tive purposes to known standards.

Working Time under Dental Unit LightThis test will tell you when the material will start to cure underthe dental unit light, if the light is at high power and positionedat a typical working distance (30in/76.2cm) from the preparation.

Volumetric ShrinkageConventional wisdom hypothesizes that low shrinkage materialsshould put less stress on the bond to tooth, which in turn meansrestorations should leak less and be more resistant to secondarycaries. Measurements were made using a computerized imagingdevice and software developed by Bisco called AccuVol. Theseshrinkage measurements were recorded after 5 and 10 seconds toascertain how much of the total shrinkage occurred in the initialstages of curing and then at five minutes after each specimen wascured for 40 seconds.

Finishing and PolishingRestorations are polished with various instruments for 30 secondsand then compared to known standards with 5 being the highestgloss and 0 being virtually no gloss.

Radiopacity We took x-rays with these products in the proximal box of theClass II preparation. Even though most of these products are notmarketed for posterior use, they may be used in deep Class IIIrestorations where radiopacity could be an issue. These x-rays canbe seen in the commentary under each product.

Microfills


If this test found that a material did not cure tothe 80% mark even at 2mm, we still assigned adepth of cure of 2mm, since clinical experiencehas shown curing virtually any material at thatthickness for 40 seconds with a reasonably effec-tive halogen light will be successful.

Description Conventional microfill designed for nonstress-bearing areas.However, according to the manufacturer, it is filled an incredible70% by weight, 60% by volume. Radiolucent.

Volumetric Shrinkage

Measured at light-cured times

5 seconds 2.6%10 seconds 2.6%5 minutes after end of curing 3.4%

Consistency and Handling Very sculptable and especially suited for full facial veneers.

Slump Test

Porosity

Shade % of voids

A2 1.3 IM 3.7

A2 IM

Renamel MicrofillCosmedent

www.cosmedent.com (4.6)REALITY’SC H O I C E S 1

Basic KitCost: $624.95/44g ($14.20/g)Includes: • 9 syringes of body shades (4g ea)

$62.95/syringe ($15.74/g) • 2 syringes of incisal shades (4g ea)

Supplemental KitCost: $624.95/44g ($14.20/g)Includes: • 9 syringes of body shades (4g ea)• 1 syringe of incisal (4g)• 1 syringe of opaque (4g)

Starter KitCost: $289.95/20g ($14.50/g)Includes:• 5 syringes (4g ea)

SuperBrite KitCost: $289.95 ($14.50/g)Includes: • 5 syringes of bleach shades (4g ea)

$62.95/syringe ($15.74/g)

Gingafill KitCost: $289.95 ($16.24/g)

Includes: • 5 syringes of gingival shades (3.5g ea)

$64.95/syringe ($16.24/g)

Shelf life: 4 years

MSDS: Included in all kits except theSuperBrite and Gingafill kits.

Shelf life: 4 years

Microfills


Product of the Year a record three timesMost shades, best handling, natural fluorescence

Bond strength lower than controlNo tips

http://www.cosmedent.com

Hardness (Knoop)22

Bond Strength (MPa)11.7

Working Time under Dental Unit Light1 minute.

Shades 37 16 Vita (A1, A2, A3, A3.5, A4, B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C2, C3,C4, D2, D3, D4). There are five other shades, A1.5, A2.5, A5,A6, and C5, which have Vita designations but are not representedon the Vita shade guide. In addition, there are three incisals (light,medium, and dark), a light opaque, body white, five SuperBriteshades (SB1, SB2, SB3, Incisal Light, and White), Body B Zero,and five Gingafill shades (light, medium, dark, orange, and blue).

Vita Shade Appears inDesignation Formula Natural Tooth

A1 A1/LI Good match A2 A2/LI Good match A3 A3/MI Good match

A3.5 A3.5/MI Good matchB1 B1/LI Good matchB3 B3/DI Good matchB4 B4/LI Good match

Light opaque is similar to an opaque A1.5 and body white is sig-nificantly lighter than B1 and very opaque. The SuperBrite shadesare very light and will no doubt match many bleached teeth. SBWhite is the lightest and is virtually identical to body white. SBIncisal Light is also virtually identical to regular Incisal Light. Ofthe three SB shades, 1 is the lightest and 3 is the darkest (althoughall three are very similar), with all being dentin-level opaque. Thelatter three shades can be found on a special Vitapan shade tab.There is also a Body B Zero, which is lighter than B1, but darkerthan the SB shades.

Gingafill light is light pink, medium is rose-colored pink, anddark is similar to a dark, almost salmon-like pink. Orange is moretranslucent than the pink shades and mimics peach/apricot, whileblue is a medium royal blue and is moderately translucent.

Translucency/Opacity (T/O)

Shade T/O rating (%)

A2 68.0B1 68.0

Body B Zero 70.1IL 29.6IM 35.0ID 38.6

SBIL 29.6SB1 70.0SB2 68.3SB3 69.3SBW 71.5

BW-Body 70.7LO 67.7

Gingafill Med 73.6

Shade GuideNone for the Vita shades—you are just supposed to use the VitaClassic. For the bleach shades, there is an optional small section ofVita 3-D guide with three plastic tabs mounted on metal handlesattached to a small plastic base. The tabs themselves are labeledOM1, OM2, and OM3. However, all of these tabs closely matchSB3, while all the rest of the SB shades are lighter than these tabs.

0%TRANSLUCENT

100%OPAQUE

Gingival Gingival Gingival Orange BlueLight Medium Dark

B1 Vita B1 W BW

SB1 SB2 SB3 B Zero

A1 A2 A3 A3.5 B1 B3 B4

Microfills


Shade Shift after Curing

Shade Shade shift after light curing

A2 LighterB1 LighterSB2 No changeBW LighterMI Lighter

Gingafill Med Lighter

Fluorescence

Radiopacity

Finishing and Polishing

Astropol 5CompoMaster 5ComposiPro Brush (small cup) 5D♦Fine 5D♦Fine Double Diamond 5 Diacomp 5FlexiCup 5Hawe HiLuster 5Jiffy HiShine 5Jiffy Polishing Cup 5PoGo 5ComposiPro Brush (reg cup) 4PDQ Composite Brush (reg cup) 4PDQ Composite Brush (small cup) 4ComposiPro One-Step 3Diagloss 3Groovy 3Hawe Occlubrush (small cup) 3 PDQ 3Hawe Occlubrush (reg cup) 2Jiffy Brush 2OneGloss 2

Packaging All kits come in simple white plastic trays with removable clearplastic covers. The screw-type syringes are color-coded to distin-guish between the body shades (tan) and the incisals (white). Themoisture-resistant labels (coated with Mylar) include the expira-tion date and the shade, but it is only identified in one area,although the ends of the plungers are laser-embossed with verylarge letters and numerals on both sides and smaller characters onthe ends to make shade identification much easier, especially ifyou use some kind of composite caddy. However, the embossingis white on the incisal plungers and difficult to read.

Since all Cosmedent's full-size trays are the same size, they canbe stacked one on top of the other reasonably well, although thisstacking function would be optimized if the trays had a solid bot-tom (they're now hollow). The shades in the specific trays areidentified on labels on both ends for easier identification.

The bleach shades and Gingafill are in their own, smaller whiteplastic trays, but there is no identification on any side. If thesetrays are stacked on a shelf, you won't know what's in them unlessyou pull them out. The plungers on the screw-type syringes for theSuperBrite shades are white, same as the incisal shades, but theselabels are white with gray and black accents.

However, there is no indication on the labels of the SB shadesthat they are, indeed, SB. This becomes particularly confusingwith Incisal Light, which is the name on the syringes of both theregular and SB versions. Unless you knew for sure that the SBlabel was different than the regular one, it would be easy to mixup the two products. Of course, since both products are virtuallyidentical, you probably are going to buy only one version. TheGingafill syringes have a pink accents and plungers.

Directions The illustrated, 64-page technique booklet still has good informa-tion, but its black and white illustrations do not compare to thecolor clinical photos that are now provided by several other man-ufacturers. SuperBrite and Gingafill have their own, cardboarddirections, which are very brief and have no photos.

Microfills


Description Reinforced, radiopaque, fluoride-releasing microfill primarilyindicated for posterior placement, but can also be used anteriorly.Filled 77% by weight, 64% by volume.




Consistency and Handling Thick, reasonably sculptable, somewhat on the sticky side.

Slump Test

Porosity Shade % of voids

A2 1.0420T 1.4

Hardness (Knoop)37

Depth of Cure (mm)2

Microfills


HeliomolarIvoclar Vivadentwww.ivoclarvivadent.us.com

(4.3)

Could be the most wear-resistant in Class I/IIVery esthetic

More difficult to cure than hybrids in Class IILack of shades limits anterior use

2Cavifil AssortmentCost: $131.25/10g ($13.13/g)

Includes:• 40 cartridges of assorted shades (0.25g ea)

$76.50/20 cartridges ($15.30/g) • Shade Guide

Syringe AssortmentCost: $312.60/24g ($13.03/g)

Includes:• 8 syringes of assorted shades (3g ea)

$61.35/syringe ($20.45/g) • Shade Guide

Shelf life: 2.5 years

MSDS: Included

A2

420T

http://www.ivoclarvivadent.us.com

Bond Strength (MPa)

Thickness of specimen Bond strength (MPa)

2mm 16.73mm 14.44mm 9.5

Curing Time for Gingival Wall Increment (6mm)

Cure time Cure % (gingival compared to occlusal)

20s 3240s 70

Working Time under Dental Unit Light0.5 minutes.

Shades 11 Eight basic shades keyed to Ivoclar's shade guide(Chromascop) and Vita (110/A1, 140/A2, 210/A3, 340/A4,310/B3, 510/C3, 410/D3, and 440/D4). This means that each ofthese shades has two different shade designations. There are alsotwo enamel shades, 110T and 420T, and 105 for pediatric andbleached teeth.


A1 A1/110T Good match A2 A2/420T Good match A3 A3/420T LighterB3 B3/420T Good match


A1 A1 Good match A2 A2 Darker A3 A3 LighterB3 B3 Good match

105 is slightly lighter than A1.



A2 76.3105 72.4420T 65.2110T 62.3

Shade GuideTabs made out of plastic, including the handle. Each tab insertsinto a plastic holder that can be pulled apart into sections andreassembled in any order you prefer. The actual tab is basically along rectangle with graduated thicknesses. The shades are identi-fied with lightly printed numerals and letters, which arereasonably readable.

The A2 tab is slightly lighter than the actual composite. Whencompared to the Vita Classic guide for A2, however, this plasticguide was also lighter.



A2 No change105 No change420T Slightly more opaque110T Slightly more opaque

Fluorescence

Radiopacity

A1 A2 A3 B3

A1 A2 A3 B3

Microfills


Vita A2 A2 A2

0%TRANSLUCENT

100%OPAQUE

Vita B1 105


Astropol 5D♦Fine 5D♦Fine Double Diamond 5 Diacomp 5Hawe HiLuster 5Jiffy HiShine 5Jiffy Polishing Cup 5CompoMaster 4ComposiPro Brush (reg cup) 4ComposiPro Brush (small cup) 4FlexiCup 4Groovy 4Hawe Occlubrush (small cup) 4 OneGloss 4PDQ Composite Brush (reg cup) 4PDQ Composite Brush (small cup) 4PoGo 4ComposiPro One-Step 3PDQ 3Diagloss 2Hawe Occlubrush (reg cup) 2Jiffy Brush 2

Packaging The kits come in cardboard boxes with rear-hinged tops and whiteplastic trays securing the contents. Each of the screw-type syringeshave color-coded labels that are moisture-resistant and include theshade, circumferentially repeated near the tip for easier identifica-tion, and expiration date. The shades are also imprinted on oneside of the ends of the plungers.

The Cavifil tips are imprinted with the name of the productplus the shade and have the expiration date on the box. These tipsare the best in the industry, well designed, with long narrow nosesallowing access to deep preparations.

Directions Small plain paper booklet printed in 11 languages. Information isreasonably current but still recommends calcium hydroxide indeep preparations.

Microfills


Description Conventional microfill designed for nonstress-bearing areas. Filled50.5% by weight, 40% by volume. Not fluoride-releasing.




Consistency and Handling Known for its excellent sculptability, especially suited for directcomposite veneers.

Slump Test

Durafill VSHeraeus Kulzer (4.2)

Syringe AssortmentCost: $463.74/32g ($14.49/g)

Includes: • 7 syringes of assorted Vita shades (4g ea)

$76.30/syringe ($19.08/g) • 1 syringe of incisal (4g)• 2 Shade Guides• 1 Shade Guide for Superlight/Cervical

PLT (Pre-Loaded Tip) AssortmentCost: $357.27/20g ($17.86/g)

Includes:• 70 tips of assorted Vita shades (0.25g ea)

$89.32/20 tips ($17.86/g) • 10 tips of incisal (0.25g ea) • 2 Shade Guides • 1 Shade Guide for Superlight/Cervical

Shelf life: 3 years

MSDS: Not included

Great handling for veneersHas stood the test of time

High incidence of voidsNo fluorescence

3

Porosity

Shade % of voids

A2 3.7 Incisal 4.5

Hardness (Knoop)24

Bond Strength (MPa)11.8

Working Time under Dental Unit Light1.25 minutes.

Shades 23 17 Vita (A1, A2, OA2, A3, OA3, A3.5, OA3.5, A4, B1, B2,OB2, B3, C1, C2, C3, C4, and D3) plus SL (Superlight), SLO(Superlight Opaque), SSL (Super Snow Light), YB (YellowBrown), DB (Dark Brown) and Incisal.


A1 OA2/A1 Good match A2 OA2/A2 Good match A3 OA3/A3 Good match

A3.5 OA3.5/A3.5 Good matchB1 OB2/B1 Good matchB3 OB2/B3 Good match

YB (Yellow Brown) actually has a strong orange-peach-like hue,while DB (Dark Brown) is about as dark as A4 but has more of agrayish appearance.

Of the bleach shades, SLO is very similar to B1, but moreopaque, SL is much lighter and more opaque than B1, and SSL isthe lightest and most opaque of the three.



A2 54.8OA2 74.0

Incisal 36.1SLO 67.0B1 60.4SSL 72.1SL 68.4

Shade GuideMade from Durafill material itself. Two white plastic holders with10 tabs in each holder. There is also a third holder with five tabsand one blank, so you can make your own if you choose. We pre-fer one guide - having three separate ones is a nuisance. Fairlyconventional in design, each tab is removable from the holder, hasa clear plastic handle, and identified with embossed numerals andletters, which are fairly difficult to read. The actual tab is shapedlike a mandibular incisor from the front and is wedge-shaped incross-section to vary its thickness.Since this guide is made from the material itself, it is a perfectmatch with the actual composite. When compared to the VitaClassic guide for A2, it was lighter.



A2 Lighter, more opaqueB1 Lighter, more opaque

Incisal More opaqueSLO Slightly lighter, slightly more opaque

Vita A2 A2 tab Durafill VSfrom kit A2

Microfills


A2

Incisal

A1 A2 A3 A3.5 B1 B3

0%TRANSLUCENT

100%OPAQUE

B1 Vita B1 SLO SL SSL

http://OA3.5/A3.5

Fluorescence


Astropol 5D♦Fine 5D♦Fine Double Diamond 5 Diacomp 5FlexiCup 5Hawe HiLuster 5Jiffy HiShine 5Jiffy Polishing Cup 5PoGo 5ComposiPro Brush (reg cup) 4ComposiPro Brush (small cup) 4Hawe Occlubrush (small cup) 4 OneGloss 4PDQ Composite Brush (reg cup) 4PDQ Composite Brush (small cup) 4CompoMaster 3ComposiPro One-Step 3Diagloss 3Groovy 3PDQ 2Hawe Occlubrush (reg cup) 1Jiffy Brush 1

Radiopacity

Packaging Both kits come in white plastic trays with plastic lids in cardboardboxes. There are divisions between the syringes keeping themsecure and separate wells for the tips. Simple, functional, notwasteful, does not take up much counter space. Screw-typesyringes with screw-type caps and calibrated plungers are all thesame color with moisture- resistant labels (same color) with theexpiration date and cure times. Shade identification is printed cir-cumferentially near the tip. The preloaded tips have the productname, shade, and medium-length nose.

Directions Plain paper booklet, 12 languages. Recommends using Durafillfor Class IV. However, we believe it should only be used to veneera Class IV, which has been built up using a hybrid. Curiously, doesnot list direct resin veneers as a recommended procedure. There isalso a plastic-laminated card with nine color illustrations, but it isnot very helpful.

Microfills


Microfills


Renamel Microfill, the flagship product fromCosmedent and the only three-time winner of ourProduct of the Year Award, is the standard againstwhich all other non-reinforced microfills are compared.It has reached this lofty perch due to the fact that it hasthe best combination of handling, shades, and commitment from the company to make sure you know how to use its products. It is the only color-coordinated system of microfills/hybrids/pack-ables/ flowables/ tints/opaquers available from onemanufacturer. These products provide more restorativeoptions than any other system, especially with thebleach shades, giving you the tools to create very nat-ural restorations. It is also the easiest microfill to polish.

All of its Vita shades match in our test teeth using theformula of the manufacturer (except we modified andsubstituted LI for DI in matching B4). Its fluorescence isalso the best in this category—just about a perfectmatch to tooth structure. Since the body shades are notquite opaque enough to block out shine-through, asacknowledged by Cosmedent, you should use RenamelUniversal for this purpose. This extensive shade selectionallows you to match just about any tooth, but we wouldalso like to have a darker opaque shade.

However, several of its shades are virtual clones ofeach other. For example, you would be hard pressed tosee the difference between Body White and SB White.Same goes for Incisal Light and SB Incisal Light. As amatter of fact, all three SB numbered shades are verysimilar. Therefore, you would be well advised to pur-chase individual shades instead of complete kits.

On the other hand, the shades in the Gingafill kitare sufficiently different from each other to warrantbuying that kit intact. While the pink shades in the kitmay not be used on a daily basis, they definitely comein handy restoring Class V restorations in teeth withrecession and when closing gingival embrasures.

Due to its radiolucency, it should be used cautiouslyin subgingival Class III restorations. Its depth of cure isminimal as evidenced by its low bond strength even at2mm. And it has a relatively high incidence of voids inthe incisal shade tested.

Heliomolar, primarily marketed for Class I and IIrestorations, has been shown to have excellent wearresistance and, certainly, being a true microfill, polish-es to a very high shine. It could, in fact, be the mostwear-resistant posterior composite on the market.And, it has stood the test of time. One additional fea-ture in Heliomolar's favor—it releases fluoride due toits radiopaque filler, ytterbium trifluoride. This fluoriderelease may be especially valuable when restoring ClassII lesions extending onto the cementum.

However, even with this fluoride release, its limiteddepth-of-cure suggests that it is probably prudent touse a hybrid for the bulk of the restoration and useHeliomolar for your surface layer due to its terrificwear resistance and surface finish. In this scenario, youprobably only need to buy the two enamel shades,although they are quite opaque and chromatic. Threeout of four of its shades matched our test teeth usingour formula (two matched without the formula), fluo-rescence is quite good, and the ability to block outshine-through with the body shades is good if youchoose to use it anteriorly. And it has the lowest inci-dence of voids in this category.

Durafill VS has been a favorite for direct veneers sincethe early 1980s and is still preferred by many due to itsterrific handling. With its good assortment of shadesand preloaded tips, it is doing all it can to stay up withthe Renamel juggernaut. However, its bond strengthwas significantly lower than our control and we haveobserved a tendency for Durafill to be slightly moreprone than the other microfills to chip if placed nearan incisal edge. All of its Vita shades matched our testteeth, but it does not fluoresce and the body shadesare quite translucent (one reason its direct veneerslook very natural) and will not block out shine-through. Due to its radiolucency, it should be usedcautiously in subgingival Class III restorations. And ithas a relatively high incidence of voids.

REALITY

Epic-TMPTParkell

Matrixx Anterior MicrofillDiscus

Ælite Aesthetic EnamelBisco

OTHER PRODUCTS IN THIS CATEGORY

www.realityesthetics.com

Documents

29115 745 758 - REALITY Publishing Company · 1. Renamel Microfill Cosmedent 2. Heliomolar Ivoclar Vivadent 3. Durafill VS Heraeus Kulzer REALITY’S CHOICES Microfills ©2005 REALITY