Background
tooth
CAVITY
In recent decades, resin composites (RCs) have demonstrated significant potential for replacing amalgam in dental restorations. In addition to their aesthetic appearance, composite restorations necessitate no significant preparations, preserve tooth structure, and have demonstrated promising clinical performance within posterior teeth [Several factors contribute to the success of direct composite restoration, such as the material properties, cavity preparation design, and the technique utilized for material application [The techniques for composite application involve layering and using thin 2 mm polymerization increments are widely used [Recently, significant efforts have been dedicated to enhancing filler technology, leading to advancements in the composite materials’ esthetic and mechanical properties. As a result, we now have nanohybrid and nanoparticle-containing composites that offer improved characteristics [Organically modified ceramics are fabricated using polycondensation and hydrolysis processes (sol-gel processing) to develop molecules with organic lateral chains and lengthy inorganic silica chain backbone [Nevertheless, the initial iteration of ormocer composites featured ormocer molecules and conventional lowered molecular weight di-methacrylate monomers, serving as diluents. The inclusion of these diluents can hinder the anticipated outcomes, and there were no evident benefits occurred when utilizing 1st generation ormocer-based fillings compared to conventional composites [In vitro studies employ various techniques to evaluate the occurrence of microleakage between the filling material and the tooth tissues [The evaluation of dental restorations is based on a variety of clinical standards. The most popular set of standards is known as Ryge’s criteria [