Literature DB >> 22044773

Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time.

Steven J Naoum1, Ayman Ellakwa, Leah Morgan, Karina White, F Elizabeth Martin, In Bog Lee.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In this study, the hypothesis that the polymerization shrinkage profile of "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite; Silorane and "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite; Kalore is not different from that of three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II) was tested.
METHODS: Five commercially available composites were analysed: one "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite (Silorane); one "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite (Kalore) and three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II). Polymerization shrinkage was measured using an electromagnetic balance which recorded changes in composite buoyancy occurring due to volumetric changes during polymerization. This instrument allowed real time volumetric shrinkage measurements to be made at 40 ms intervals.
RESULTS: All five resin composites demonstrated a similar volumetric shrinkage profile during polymerization. The rate of shrinkage of all five composites decreased from t=0 at a rate approximating x=t. After 170 s the rate of shrinkage of all five composites was at or below 0.01%/s. During the initial 5s of light exposure Silorane and Kalore exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) rate of contraction relative to the three conventional methacrylate composites. After 640 s of analysis, Silorane exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) percentage volumetric contraction compared to the other four analysed materials.
CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed "low shrinkage" composites (Silorane, Kalore) in the present study demonstrated significantly lower (p<0.05) shrinkage rates and shrinkage volumes compared to the three conventional methacrylate composites. Investigation to identify whether polymerization shrinkage profile analysis is a good predictor of relative polymerization contraction stress levels generated by different composites, is warranted. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians making a resin composite selection with the view to minimizing the clinical effects of polymerization shrinkage must consider the rate of polymerization as well as the total volumetric shrinkage of a composite. Silorane (non methacrylate composite) and Kalore (high molecular mass methacrylate composite) have the ability to exhibit lower shrinkage rates and lower shrinkage volumes compared to conventional methacrylate composites. Crown
Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22044773     DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.10.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dent        ISSN: 0300-5712            Impact factor:   4.379


  5 in total

Review 1.  Polymerization shrinkage assessment of dental resin composites: a literature review.

Authors:  Dalia Kaisarly; Moataz El Gezawi
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 2.634

2.  Comparison of laser- and bur-prepared class I cavities restored with two different low-shrinkage composite resins: a randomized, controlled 60-month clinical trial.

Authors:  O Z Fatma Dilsad; Esra Ergin; Nuray Attar; Sevil Gurgan
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2019-05-17       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Color stability of Bulk-Fill composite restorations.

Authors:  Marianna-Falcão Silva; Marlon-Ferreira Dias; Paulo-Cardoso Lins-Filho; Claudio-Heliomar-Vicente Silva; Renata-Pedrosa Guimarães
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-11-01

4.  Cytotoxicity and cytokine expression induced by silorane and methacrylate-based composite resins.

Authors:  Daniele Lucca Longo; Francisco Wanderley Garcia Paula-Silva; Lucia Helena Faccioli; Patrícia Maria Gatón-Hernández; Alexandra Mussolino de Queiroz; Léa Assed Bezerra da Silva
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.698

5.  Marginal Adaptation and Micropermeability of Class II Cavities Restored with Three Different Types of Resin Composites-A Comparative Ten-Month In Vitro Study.

Authors:  Sevda Mihailova Yantcheva
Journal:  Polymers (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 4.329

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.