Performance

The Dental Advisor; Clinical Evaluation of Aura, 2015.

Clinical Observations:

Handling: Aura nano-hybrid composites handle extremely well. The viscosity has sufficient body for packing without being too stiff. Sculpting anatomy can be done with no sticking of the instrument to the composite. The Enamel shades are softer and waxier.

Shades:

The AURA shading system was new to the consultants, requiring a shift in how they approached shade selection. While it was not difficult to learn, consultants were resistant to change from the familiar Vita system. The Multipurpose Chroma shades blend well and work as a universal anterior/posterior single-layer composite.

Esthetics:

The Aura system provides a variety of composites to satisfy all clinical situations. Shades blend well with the tooth, and they all polish well. Use of the Aura Dentin Chroma shades replicate the opacity of dentin and are especially useful in Class III and Class IV restorations. Aura Enamel polishes to a high shine, matching the gloss of tooth enamel. Aura Bulk Fill is fairly

AURA was given a 4 1/2 Plus product rating and a 91% for clinical rating by The Dental Advisor evaluators. AURA was also awarded the 2015 Preferred Product.

Performance

Dental Barometer –  The Independent Professional Magazine For Dentistry: 2015.

Peers review and a clinical case study using Aura.

Performance

Sundaralingrm S. et al; Comparison of VolumetricShrinkage in Composite Bulk Fill Products; AADR Abstracts #1160, Tufts University, Boston; 2016.

Aim: To evaluate and compare the volumetric shrinkage of five commercially available bulk-fill composite materials – Aura Bulk Fill (SDI), Fltek Bulk Fill Posterior (3M/Espe), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (Ivoclar), SurefIl SDR Flow (Dentsply) and SonicFill (Kerr).

Conclusion: Aura Bulk Fill had the second lowest volumetric shrinkage with SDR ( Denstply) the highest amount.

Performance

Sundaralingrm S. et al; Comparison of DOC (Depth of Cure) and Hardness in Composite Bulk Fill Products; AADR Abstracts #0643, Tufts University, Boston; 2016.

Aim: To evaluate and compare the depth of cure (DOC) and hardness of five commercially available bulk-fill composite materials – Aura Bulk Fill (SDI), Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior (3M/Espe), Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (Ivoclar), SurefIl SDR Flow (Dentsply) and SonicFill (Kerr).

Conclusion: Depth of Cure of all products was greater than 80% upto a 5mm depth, indiacting that these products are cured to a clinically acceptable degree. Aura Bulk Fill may have a DOC closer to 6mm depth was 78.7% and 78.1%, respectively. Variation may be due to the differences in composition of each of the materials.

Performance

The Dental Advisor; Clinical Evaluation of Aura Bulk Fill, 2016.

Aura Bulk Fill was evaluated by 33 consultants in 657 and  was given a 4 1/2 Plus product rating with an overall rating of 94%.

Clinical Evaluation comments & results

  • “The composites handles well, adapting to cavity walls and allowing sculpting without sticking to the instrument.
  • “The single, universal shade approximates A2 and blends well with surrounding enamel”
  • “I can finish most of my posterior restorations in a single layer because of the deep curing”
  • “Easy to extrude and handling is amazing”
  • “The universal shade is really just that. I did not expect the color to blend with most teeth, but it did!”