scholarly journals Localized and Generalized Simulated Wear of Resin Composites

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-335 ◽  
Author(s):  
WW Barkmeier ◽  
T Takamizawa ◽  
RL Erickson ◽  
A Tsujimoto ◽  
M Latta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Volume Loss ◽  
Wear Simulation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Stainless Steel Ball ◽  
Facet Surface ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
3D Software

SUMMARY A laboratory study was conducted to examine the wear of resin composite materials using both a localized and generalized wear simulation model. Twenty specimens each of seven resin composites (Esthet•X HD [HD], Filtek Supreme Ultra [SU], Herculite Ultra [HU], SonicFill [SF], Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill [TB], Venus Diamond [VD], and Z100 Restorative [Z]) were subjected to a wear challenge of 400,000 cycles for both localized and generalized wear in a Leinfelder-Suzuki wear simulator (Alabama machine). The materials were placed in custom cylinder-shaped stainless steel fixtures. A stainless steel ball bearing (r=2.387 mm) was used as the antagonist for localized wear, and a stainless steel, cylindrical antagonist with a flat tip was used for generalized wear. A water slurry of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) beads was used as the abrasive media. A noncontact profilometer (Proscan 2100) with Proscan software was used to digitize the surface contours of the pretest and posttest specimens. AnSur 3D software was used for wear assessment. For localized testing, maximum facet depth (μm) and volume loss (mm3) were used to compare the materials. The mean depth of the facet surface (μm) and volume loss (mm3) were used for comparison of the generalized wear specimens. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey post hoc test were used for data analysis of volume loss for both localized and generalized wear, maximum facet depth for localized wear, and mean depth of the facet for generalized wear. The results for localized wear simulation were as follows [mean (standard deviation)]: maximum facet depth (μm)—Z, 59.5 (14.7); HU, 99.3 (16.3); SU, 102.8 (13.8); HD, 110.2 (13.3); VD, 114.0 (10.3); TB, 125.5 (12.1); SF, 195.9 (16.9); volume loss (mm3)— Z, 0.013 (0.002); SU, 0.026 (0.006); HU, 0.043 (0.008); VD, 0.057 (0.009); HD, 0.058 (0.014); TB, 0.061 (0.010); SF, 0.135 (0.024). Generalized wear simulation results were as follows: mean depth of facet (μm)—Z, 9.3 (3.4); SU, 12.8 (3.1); HU, 15.6 (3.2); TB, 19.2 (4.8); HD, 26.8 (6.5); VD, 29.1 (5.5); SF, 35.6 (8.4); volume loss (mm3)—Z, 0.132 (0.049); SU, 0.0179 (0.042); HU, 0.224 (0.044); TB, 0.274 (0.065); HD, 0.386 (0.101); VD, 0.417 (0.076); SF, 0.505 (0.105). The ANOVA showed a significant difference among materials (p<0.001) for facet depth and volume loss for both localized and generalized wear. The post hoc test revealed differences (p<0.05) in localized and generalized wear values among the seven resin composites examined in this study. The findings provide valuable information regarding the relative wear characteristics of the materials in this study.

Wear Rates of Resin Composites

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 226-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
WW Barkmeier ◽  
RL Erickson ◽  
MA Latta ◽  
TM Wilwerding
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Composite Materials ◽  
Wear Rate ◽  
Loss Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Linear Wear ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Volume Loss ◽  
Wear Rates ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY A laboratory study was conducted to examine the wear of resin composite materials using a generalized wear simulation model. Ten specimens each of five resin composites (Esthet•X [EX], Filtek Supreme Plus [SP], Filtek Z250 [Z2], Tetric EvoCeram [EC], and Z100 Restorative [Z1]) were subjected to wear challenges of 100,000, 400,000, 800,000, and 1,200,000 cycles. The materials were placed in cylinder-shaped stainless-steel fixtures, and wear was generated using a flat stainless-steel antagonist in a slurry of polymethylmethacrylate beads. Wear (mean facet depth [μm] and volume loss [mm3]) was determined using a noncontact profilometer (Proscan 2000) with Proscan and ProForm software. Statistical analysis of the laboratory data using analysis of variance and Tukey's post hoc test showed a significant difference (p<0.05) for mean wear facet depth and volume loss for both the number of cycles and resin composite material. Linear regression analysis was used to develop predictive wear rates and volume loss rates. Linear wear was demonstrated with correlation coefficients (R2) ranging from 0.914 to 0.995. Mean wear values (mean facet depth [μm]) and standard deviations (SD) for 1200K cycles were as follows: Z1 13.9 (2.0), Z2 26.7 (2.7), SP 30.1 (4.1), EC 31.8 (2.3), and EX 67.5 (8.2). Volume loss (mm3) and SDs for 1200K cycles were as follows: Z1 0.248 (0.036), Z2 0.477 (0.044), SP 0.541 (0.072), EC 0.584 (0.037), and EX 1.162 (0.139). The wear rate (μm) and volume loss rate (mm3) per 100,000 cycles for the five resin composites were as follows: wear rate Z1 0.58, EC 1.27, Z2 1.49, SP 1.62, and EX 4.35, and volume loss rate Z1 0.009, EC 0.024, Z2 0.028, SP 0.029, and EX 0.075. The generalized wear model appears to be an excellent method for measuring relative wear of resin composite materials.

Mechanical Properties and Simulated Wear of Provisional Resin Materials

2015 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 603-613 ◽  
Author(s):  
T Takamizawa ◽  
WW Barkmeier ◽  
A Tsujimoto ◽  
D Scheidel ◽  
RL Erickson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Elastic Modulus ◽  
Flexural Strength ◽  
Wear Behavior ◽  
Flexural Properties ◽  
Wear Depth ◽  
Volume Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Pmma Resin

SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to determine flexural properties and erosive wear behavior of provisional resin materials. Three bis-acryl base provisional resins—1) Protemp Plus (PP), 2) Integrity (IG), 3) Luxatemp Automix Plus (LX)—and a conventional poly(methylmethacrylate) (PMMA) resin, UniFast III (UF), were evaluated. A resin composite, Z100 Restorative (Z1), was included as a benchmark material. Six specimens for each of the four materials were used to determine flexural strength and elastic modulus according to ISO Standard 4049. Twelve specimens for each material were used to examine wear using a generalized wear simulation model. The test materials were each subjected to wear challenges of 25,000, 50,000, 100,000, and 200,000 cycles in a Leinfelder-Suzuki (Alabama) wear simulator. The materials were placed in custom cylinder-shaped stainless-steel fixtures, and wear was generated using a cylindrical-shaped flat-ended stainless-steel antagonist in a slurry of nonplasticized PMMA beads. Wear (mean facet depth [μm] and volume loss [mm3]) was determined using a noncontact profilometer (Proscan 2100) with Proscan and AnSur 3D software. The laboratory data were evaluated using two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA; factors: 1) material and 2) cycles) followed by Tukey HSD post hoc test (α=0.05). The flexural strength ranged from 68.2 to 150.6 MPa, and the elastic modulus ranged from 2.0 to 15.9 GPa. All of the bis-acryl provisional resins (PP, IG, and LX) demonstrated significantly higher values than the PMMA resin (UF) in flexural strength and elastic modulus (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference (p>0.05) in flexural properties among three bis-acryl base provisional resins (PP, IG, and LX). Z1 demonstrated significantly (p<0.05) higher flexural strength and elastic modulus than the other materials tested. The results for mean facet wear depth (μm) and standard deviations (SD) for 200,000 cycles were as follows: PP, 22.4 (5.0); IG, 51.0 (6.5); LX, 63.7 (4.5); UF, 70.5 (8.0); and Z1, 7.6 (1.2). Volume loss (mm3) and SDs for 200,000 cycles were as follows: PP, 0.311 (0.049); IG, 0.737 (0.074); LX, 0.919 (0.053); UF, 1.046 (0.127); and Z1, 0.111 (0.017). The two-way ANOVA showed a significant difference among materials (p<0.001) and number of cycles for both facet depth and volume loss. The post hoc test revealed differences (p<0.05) in wear values among the tested materials examined in this study. The findings provide valuable information regarding the flexural properties and the relative wear behavior of the provisional resins examined in this study.

Effect of Remineralizing Agents on Bond Strength of Resin-Composites to Primary Enamel

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 331-336
Author(s):  
Faika Y Abdelmegid ◽  
Fouad S Salama ◽  
Eman I Abouobaid ◽  
Hassan S Halawany ◽  
Mohamad K Alhadlaq
Keyword(s):  
Bond Strength ◽  
Shear Bond Strength ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Bond Failure ◽  
In Vitro Investigation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mode Of Failure ◽  
Post Hoc

Aim: The purpose of this in vitro investigation was to assess the effect of three remineralizing agents (Voco Remin Pro®, Uncle Harry's remineralization kit, Sunshine remineralization gel) on the shear bond strengths of two resin-composites (Tetric® N-Ceram and Filtek™ Z250 Universal Restorative) to enamel of primary molars. Study design: Ninety-six enamel specimens were prepared and randomly distributed to eight groups according to the control, remineralizing agents, and resin composite used. Shear bond strength was measured at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min and the type of bond failure was recorded. Results: The highest shear bond strength (Mean+SD) in MPa was for Tetric® N-Ceram/control [21.06+1.68] while the lowest was for Filtek™ Z250/Sunshine remineralization gel [11.98+1.46]. Tukey HSD Post Hoc Tests showed significant difference between Tetric® N-Ceram/control and all other groups (p=0.0001) except Filtek™ Z250/control. In addition, there was significant difference between Filtek™ Z250/control and all other groups (p=0.0001) except Tetric® N-Ceram/control and Tetric® N-Ceram/Uncle Harry's remineralization kit. Mode of failure was cohesive (9.38%), adhesive (55.21%), and mixed (35.42%). Conclusions: The three tested remineralizing agents affect shear bond strength of the tested resin-composites to enamel of primary teeth. In general, shear bond strength values were acceptable. Mode of failure was mostly adhesive.

Influence of Thermal Stress on Simulated Localized and Generalized Wear of Nanofilled Resin Composites

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 380-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Tsujimoto ◽  
WW Barkmeier ◽  
T Takamizawa ◽  
MA Latta ◽  
M Miyazaki
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Thermal Stress ◽  
Polymethyl Methacrylate ◽  
Ball Bearing ◽  
Water Storage ◽  
Wear Testing ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Steel Cylinder ◽  
Stainless Steel Ball ◽  
3D Software

SUMMARY Objective: This study investigated the influence of thermal stress on the simulated localized and generalized wear of nanofilled resin composites. Methods: Six nanofilled resin composites were evaluated and then subjected to a wear challenge of 400,000 cycles in a Leinfelder-Suzuki (Alabama) wear simulation device after 24 hours of water storage (24-hour group) and 24 hours of water storage and 10,000 thermal cycles (TC group). Simulated localized wear was generated using a stainless-steel ball bearing, and simulated generalized wear was generated using a flat-ended stainless-steel cylinder. Wear testing was accomplished in a water slurry of polymethyl methacrylate beads. Simulated localized and generalized wear was determined using a noncontact profilometer (Proscan 2100) in conjunction with Proscan and AnSur 3D software. Results: Wear was significantly different (p<0.05) among the resin composites for both simulated localized and generalized wear of either the 24-hour group or the TC group. The simulated localized wear of the TC group was significantly greater than that of the 24-hour group; however, the simulated generalized wear of most of the resin composites of the TC group was not significantly different from that of the 24-hour group. Conclusion: The simulated localized and generalized wear of nanofilled resin composites is material dependent. The simulated localized wear of nanofilled resin composites appears to be influenced by thermal stress, whereas this effect is not as apparent in simulated generalized wear testing.

scholarly journals The effect of one-step and multi-step polishing systems on the surface roughness and microhardness of novel resin composites

2012 ◽  
Vol 06 (02) ◽  
pp. 198-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ugur Erdemir ◽  
Hande Sar Sancakli ◽  
Esra Yildiz
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
In Vitro Study ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
One Step ◽  
Wet Ground ◽  
Post Hoc

ABSTRACTObjectives: The objective of this in vitro study was to evaluate the surface roughness and microhardness of three novel resin composites containing nanoparticles after polishing with one-step and conventional multi-step polishing systems.Methods: A total of 126 specimens (10 X 2 mm) were prepared in a metal mold using three nanocomposites (Filtek Supreme XT, Ceram-X, and Grandio), 21 specimens of each resin composite for both tests (n=63 for each test). Following light curing, seven specimens from each group received no polishing treatment and served as controls for both tests. The specimens were randomly polished using PoGo and Sof-Lex systems for 30 seconds after being wet-ground with 1200-grit silicon carbide paper. The mean surface roughness of each polished specimen was determined with a profilometer. The microhardness was determined using a Vickers hardness measuring instrument with a 200-g load and 15 seconds dwell time. The data were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test and the post hoc Dunn's multiple comparison tests at a significance level of .05.Results: Among all materials, the smoothest surfaces were obtained under a matrix strip (control) (P<.05). There were no statistically significant differences among polishing systems in the resin composites for surface roughness (P>.05). The lowest hardness values for the three resin composites were obtained with a matrix strip, and there was a statistically significant difference compared with other polishing systems (P<.05) whereas no statistically significant differences were observed between the polishing systems (P<.05).Conclusion: The current one-step polishing system appears to be as effective as multi-step systems and may be preferable for polishing resin composite restorations. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:198-205)

scholarly journals How do the optical properties of the bulk fill posterior composites change after 2 years of simulated toothbrushing?

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 378-386
Author(s):  
Leticia Souza Lopes ◽  
Helio Rodrigues Sampaio Filho ◽  
Elisa Gomes Albuquerque ◽  
Chane Tardem ◽  
Mauro Sayão Miranda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Optical Properties ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
High Viscosity ◽  
Composite Resins ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Composite Control ◽  
Multifactor Analysis ◽  
Post Hoc

The objective of this study was to evaluate the alteration of the optical properties of bulk Fill resin-based composites after 2 years of simulated toothbrushing. Three high-viscosity bulk fill resin composites and one conventional sculptable resin composite (control) were analyzed. Five specimens of each resin composite were prepared, and roughness, color, translucency and gloss were evaluated initially and after one and two years of simulated toothbrushing. The specimens were submitted to electric simulated toothbrushing (14600 strokes/100g) using a commercially available toothbrush with soft fibers and toothpaste slurry in a proportion of 1:2 by weight. The brushing scheme was of 40 cycles per day (2 cycles per second / 280 cycles in a week). The optical properties and the roughness data were analyzed by a multifactor analysis of variance (MANOVA) and a Tukey post hoc test. The baseline and final values of Ra and Sa were submitted to linear regression analyses, all of which were performed at a significance level of p=0.05. Gloss and roughness presented statistical differences between the resin-time interactions in all composite resins. The gloss (72.5%) and roughness (89.4%) worsened significantly after brushing, but the authors didn’t find statistically significant differences when evaluating translucency and color. Based in the results, it could be concluded that the simulated brushing degraded the brightness and roughness of the used high-viscosity bulk fill composites.

scholarly journals Effect of Toothbrushing-mouthrinse-cycling on Surface Roughness and Topography of Nanofilled, Microfilled, and Microhybrid Resin Composites

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 521-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
EM da Silva ◽  
CUF de Sá Rodrigues ◽  
DA Dias ◽  
S da Silva ◽  
CM Amaral ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Roughness ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Artificial Saliva ◽  
Filler Particle ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Topographic Analysis ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Multifactor Analysis ◽  
Post Hoc

SUMMARY The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of toothbrushing-mouthrinse-cycling (TMC) on the surface roughness and topography of three resin composites with different filler particle systems (Z350, nanofilled [Nf]; Durafill, microfilled [Mf], and Empress Direct, microhybrid [Mh]). Twenty specimens of each resin composite (8.0 mm diameter and 2 mm height) were randomly divided into four groups (n=5) according to the mouthrinses: alcohol-free (Plax – P) and alcohol-containing (Listerine – L and Plax Fresh Mint – PM) and artificial saliva (control – AS). The specimens were submitted to TMC for nine weeks. A surface roughness tester and a three-dimensional profilometer were used to measure the roughness (Ra) and the topography (Sa) before and after TMC. The data were analyzed by multifactor analysis of variance and Tukey post hoc test (α=0.05). In all media, Mh presented greater roughness than Mf (p&lt;0.05). The highest value of roughness was presented by Mh immersed in L (p&lt;0.05). The lowest values of roughness were presented by Mf (p&lt;0.05). The three resin composites presented the highest roughness after immersion in mouthrinses containing alcohol (PM and L) (p&lt;0.05). For the three resin composites, the increase in roughness was noticeable after the fifth week. Topographic analysis showed that the smoothest surfaces were present after immersion in AS.

Clinical Evaluation of a Silorane- and a Methacrylate-Based Resin Composite in Class II Restorations: 24-Month Results

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. E102-E110 ◽  
Author(s):  
E Karaman ◽  
AR Yazici ◽  
G Ozgunaltay ◽  
I Ustunkol ◽  
A Berber
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Adhesive System ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Restorative Materials ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Self Etch

SUMMARY Objective: To compare the 24-month clinical performance of two different resin composites in class II slot restorations. Methods and Materials: Thirty-seven patients having at least two approximal carious lesions were enrolled in the study. A total of 116 teeth (58 pairs) were restored with either a silorane-based composite (Filtek Silorane) and its self-etch adhesive (Silorane Adhesive System, 3M ESPE) or a methacrylate-based packable resin composite (X-tra Fil) and its self-etch adhesive (Futurabond NR, VOCO GmbH) according to the toss of a coin. The restorations were evaluated at baseline and at six-, 12-, and 24-month recalls by two calibrated examiners according to the modified US Public Health Service criteria. The comparison of the two restorative materials for each category was performed with the Pearson chi-square test. Within group differences of the materials at different recall times were compared using the Cochran Q and Friedman tests. Bonferroni-adjusted McNemar test was used when significant difference was found (p&lt;0.05). Results: After 24 months, no statistically significant differences were found between the two restorative materials for the criteria evaluated. Conclusions: Both silorane- and methacrylate-based resin composites showed clinically acceptable performance in class II slot restorations after 24 months.

Marginal Gap Formation in Approximal “Bulk Fill” Resin Composite Restorations After Artificial Ageing

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 180-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Peutzfeldt ◽  
S Mühlebach ◽  
A Lussi ◽  
S Flury
Keyword(s):  
Tap Water ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Artificial Ageing ◽  
Resin Composites ◽  
Gap Formation ◽  
Marginal Gap ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Significant Difference

SUMMARY The aim of this in vitro study was to investigate the marginal gap formation of a packable “regular” resin composite (Filtek Supreme XTE [3M ESPE]) and two flowable “bulk fill” resin composites (Filtek Bulk Fill [3M ESPE] and SDR [DENTSPLY DeTrey]) along the approximal margins of Class II restorations. In each of 39 extracted human molars (n=13 per resin composite), mesial and distal Class II cavities were prepared, placing the gingival margins below the cemento-enamel junction. The cavities were restored with the adhesive system OptiBond FL (Kerr) and one of the three resin composites. After restoration, each molar was cut in half in the oro-vestibular direction between the two restorations, resulting in two specimens per molar. Polyvinylsiloxane impressions were taken and “baseline” replicas were produced. The specimens were then divided into two groups: At the beginning of each month over the course of six months' tap water storage (37°C), one specimen per molar was subjected to mechanical toothbrushing, whereas the other was subjected to thermocycling. After artificial ageing, “final” replicas were produced. Baseline and final replicas were examined under the scanning electron microscope (SEM), and the SEM micrographs were used to determine the percentage of marginal gap formation in enamel or dentin. Paramarginal gaps were registered. The percentages of marginal gap formation were statistically analyzed with a nonparametric analysis of variance followed by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests, and all p-values were corrected with the Bonferroni-Holm adjustment for multiple testing (significance level: α=0.05). Paramarginal gaps were analyzed descriptively. In enamel, significantly lower marginal gap formation was found for Filtek Supreme XTE compared to Filtek Bulk Fill (p=0.0052) and SDR (p=0.0289), with no significant difference between Filtek Bulk Fill and SDR (p=0.4072). In dentin, significantly lower marginal gap formation was found for SDR compared to Filtek Supreme XTE (p&lt;0.0001) and Filtek Bulk Fill (p=0.0015), with no significant difference between Filtek Supreme XTE and Filtek Bulk Fill (p=0.4919). Marginal gap formation in dentin was significantly lower than in enamel (p&lt;0.0001). The percentage of restorations with paramarginal gaps varied between 0% and 85%, and for all three resin composites the percentages were markedly higher after artificial ageing. The results from this study suggest that in terms of marginal gap formation in enamel, packable resin composites may be superior to flowable “bulk fill” resin composites, while in dentin some flowable “bulk fill” resin composites may be superior to packable ones.

scholarly journals Survival Rates of Class II Restoration in Primary Molar with Flowable Resin Composite

2021 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
Hyejun Seo ◽  
Soyoung Park ◽  
Eungyung Lee ◽  
Taesung Jeong ◽  
Jonghyun Shin
Keyword(s):  
Stainless Steel ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Resin Composite ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Primary Molars ◽  
Primary Molar ◽  
Proximal Caries ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Significant Difference

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the survival rate by comparing Class II restoration using flowable resin composite with stainless steel crown in primary molars.Electronic medical records and radiographs of 1,504 primary molars with proximal caries of 590 patients from June 2015 to August 2019 were analyzed. With the collected data, survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method.The 1-year survival rate of flowable resin composite in the primary molar was 98.5%, 3-year survival rate was 87.7%, and mean survival time was 39 months. There was no statistically significant difference between flowable resin composite and stainless steel crown (<i>p</i> = 0.896).Within the limits of this study, Class II restoration using flowable resin composite can be considered a promising option for the treatment of proximal caries in primary molars.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document