Objective: Evaluation of microhardness and compressive strength of Cention N in comparison to nanohybrid bulk fill resin composite and glass ionomer cement (GIC).
Methodology: A total of 30 specimens were prepared for microhardness evaluation, divided into three key groups of ten specimens each depending on the type of bulk fill restorative material used; Cention N, Tetric Evo Ceram bulk fill resin composite and Fuji IX GP groups. Specimens were prepared using a specially constructed 4 mm thickness cylindrical Teflon mold with a diameter of 6 mm. All specimens were stored in distilled water at room temperature for 24 hours then subjected for Vickers microhardness tester. Assessment of compressive strength of the tested restorative materials necessitates fabrication of 30 specimens with a diameter of 3mm and 6mm thickness (ten specimens each). Universal testing machine was used for evaluation of compressive strength of all tested materials. Results obtained were subjected to one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD test (P values of 0.05).
Results: Both microhardness and compressive strength tests results showed that there was no significant difference between Tetric EVO Ceram and Cention N (p < 0.001), meanwhile both of them are significantly higher than Fugi IX GP.
Conclusions: Under the limitation of the current study, the bioactive composite Cention N is a promising bulk fill resin composite restoration in the posterior region in terms of tested mechanical properties.
Key words: Cention N, bulk fill resin composite, GIC, microhardness, compressive strength.