Ruwaida Z Alshali1, Nesreen A Salim2, Julian D Satterthwaite3, Nick Silikas4. 1. School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Mancheste, UK; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. 2. Prosthodontic Department, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. 3. School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Mancheste, UK. 4. School of Dentistry, The University of Manchester, Higher Cambridge Street, Mancheste, UK. Electronic address: nick.silikas@manchester.ac.uk.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess sorption and solubility of several bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites after one-year storage in water and artificial saliva (AS). METHODS: Six bulk-fill (SureFil SDR, Venus Bulk Fill, X-tra base, Filtek Bulk Fill flowable, Sonic Fill, and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill) and eight conventional resin-composites (Grandioso Flow, Venus Diamond Flow, XFlow, Filtek Supreme XTE, Grandioso, Venus Diamond, TPH Spectrum, and Filtek Z250) were tested. Disc shaped samples (n=5) were randomly immersed into distilled water and AS for one-year period and weighed at different time intervals. Data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey's post hoc test (α=0.05). RESULTS: In water, all materials (with the exception of X-Flow) reached a stable mass within three months with a slow increase observed in AS up to one year. Sorption values in water and AS for most materials were not significantly different (p≥0.2). Sorption and solubility values in water ranged from (6.5 μg/mm(3) and -1.77 μg/mm(3) respectively) for X-tra base to (78.8 μg/mm(3) and 44.77 μg/mm(3) respectively) for X-Flow (p<0.005). Sorption of the polymer matrix in water ranged from 1.18% for XB to 9.95 % for XF. CONCLUSIONS: Water sorption and solubility of resin-composites are material-dependent and highly affected by the filler loading and hydrophilicity of the resin matrix. BisEMA and UDMA-BisEMA based resins appeared to be more hydrophobic than BisGMA based systems. Water and AS, are generally comparable as storage media in terms of water sorption. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Bulk-fill materials and conventional resin-composites tested varied in terms of sorption and solubility but both were considered stable in longterm water storage. The composition of each material is critical and can affect the long-term clinical performance of either type of resincomposites.
OBJECTIVES: To assess sorption and solubility of several bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites after one-year storage in water and artificial saliva (AS). METHODS: Six bulk-fill (SureFil SDR, Venus Bulk Fill, X-tra base, Filtek Bulk Fill flowable, Sonic Fill, and Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill) and eight conventional resin-composites (Grandioso Flow, Venus Diamond Flow, XFlow, Filtek Supreme XTE, Grandioso, Venus Diamond, TPH Spectrum, and Filtek Z250) were tested. Disc shaped samples (n=5) were randomly immersed into distilled water and AS for one-year period and weighed at different time intervals. Data were analysed using repeated measures ANOVA, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey's post hoc test (α=0.05). RESULTS: In water, all materials (with the exception of X-Flow) reached a stable mass within three months with a slow increase observed in AS up to one year. Sorption values in water and AS for most materials were not significantly different (p≥0.2). Sorption and solubility values in water ranged from (6.5 μg/mm(3) and -1.77 μg/mm(3) respectively) for X-tra base to (78.8 μg/mm(3) and 44.77 μg/mm(3) respectively) for X-Flow (p<0.005). Sorption of the polymer matrix in water ranged from 1.18% for XB to 9.95 % for XF. CONCLUSIONS:Water sorption and solubility of resin-composites are material-dependent and highly affected by the filler loading and hydrophilicity of the resin matrix. BisEMA and UDMA-BisEMA based resins appeared to be more hydrophobic than BisGMA based systems. Water and AS, are generally comparable as storage media in terms of water sorption. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Bulk-fill materials and conventional resin-composites tested varied in terms of sorption and solubility but both were considered stable in longterm water storage. The composition of each material is critical and can affect the long-term clinical performance of either type of resincomposites.