Background: Bioactive resin composites are aimed to discharge remineralizing ions, raise pH levels, and precipitate hydroxyapatite, thereby enhancing effectiveness of restorations.Aims: this study focused on evaluate and compare element analysis of restoration /dentin interface by SEM/EDX of conventional and bioactive bulk fill composite.Materials and Methods: A total of sixty extracted maxillary premolars was used. Teeth were divided into three groups based on the composite type: Group A (Tetric Power Fill), Group B (Predicta Bioactive), and Group C (Cention Forte). Each group was further subdivided into two subgroups: one without storage and one stored in artificial saliva for 30 days. The occlusal dentin exposed by sectioning 2 mm below the deepest occlusal point, and restorations was placed using the bulk-fill technique. Then the samples sectioned vertically in a mesiodistal way, and restoration–dentin interface was analyzed by SEM/EDX for elemental composition.Results: Cention Forte (storge group) exhibited highest Ca/P ratio (4.01±1.98), followed by its (non-storge) (1.97±0.38) while Predicta Bioactive showed high value in (storge group) (2.71±0.34). There was significant difference of Tetric power fill with both Cention Forte and predicta bioactive between nonstorage and storage groups at (p≤0.05).Conclusion: The SEM /EDX analysis exhibited an increase the Ca/P ratio in dentin area corresponding to both Cention Forte and Predicta Bioactive. Consequently, based on current study outcomes, these materials may be designated as bioactive bulk fill resin restorative materials.
ahmed et al. (Mon,) studied this question.