Filler size of resin-composites, percentage of voids and fracture toughness: is there a correlation?

Elbishari, Haitham; Silikas, Nick; Satterthwaite, Julian D.

doi:10.4012/dmj.2011-256

Cited by 36 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1. That corroborates to the findings in previous studies [11][12][13]. The presence of pores in glass-ionomers microstructure can be attributed to the following factors: air incorporation during powder and liquid hand-mixture that decreases the polymer conversion degree due to inhibition of the setting reaction by the oxygen in the bubbles; placement technique of the material into the tooth cavity where the air bubbles are incorporated or entrapped into the material; and changes in powder/ liquid proportion before mixture [13,14].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of porosity, microstructure, and chemical composition on the wear and compressive strength of dental glass-ionomer or resin composite. Cylindrical samples (6 9 4 mm) were prepared from a nano-hybrid resin composite (Grandio Ò SO/RC, VOCO), a resin-modified glass ionomer (Vitremer TM /VI, 3 M-ESPE) and a conventional glass ionomer (Ionofil Ò Molar/CO, VOCO). Porosity and topography of the materials were evaluated by optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Roughness was evaluated by R a and R t parameters at 0.1 mm/s under cutoff of 0.8 mm. Then, compressive tests were performed at 1 mm/min. Wear tests were carried out at 20 N, 2.5 mm of displacement, at 1 Hz for 90 min in artificial saliva solution. The results were statistically analyzed with a one-way ANOVA and Tukey's test (p \ 0.05). Resin composite revealed a significantly lower porosity (1.21 ± 0.20 %) than glass-ionomer restoratives (5.69-7.54 %) as well as lower values of R a and R t roughness (p \ 0.05). Also, resin composite showed significantly higher values of mechanical strength (334 ± 15.9 MPa) compared to conventional (78.78 ± 13.30 MPa) or modified glass ionomer (169.50 ± 20.98 MPa) (p \ 0.05). For maximal depth of wear, resin composite also showed significantly lower values than glass ionomer (p \ 0.05). Homogeneous wear morphology was noticed by SEM analyses on glass ionomers in opposition to resin composite. Glass ionomers showed a poor mechanical behavior associated to a high porosity and wear rate when compared to resin composite.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…A slower mixing can avoid air incorporation by breaking some bubbles [13,15]. Considering dental resin composites, the formation of pores can occur during the manufacturing process [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing the filler content of a sealant increases its viscosity. 32 When SEP is used to prepare the tooth surface, even though most of the primer is removed, a thin layer remains after air drying. When a bracket having a 70%-filled composite is applied to this primer layer, the resin might be viscous enough to maintain its integrity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retention of sealants during orthodontic treatment: An in vitro comparison of two etching protocols

Chau

Campbell

Deljavan

et al. 2014

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To test the retention of smooth-surface sealants bonded with different etching protocols against toothbrushing and, secondarily, to characterize the type and location of sealant loss. Materials and Methods: Eighty-nine extracted human teeth were randomly assigned one of two etching protocols: 37% phosphoric acid etch (ETCH) or self-etching primer (SEP). Six specimens at a time were placed in a toothbrushing machine to simulate 4, 8, 12, and 24 months of toothbrush abrasion. Using black-light photographs of each specimen taken before and after brushing, four blinded coinvestigators determined new sealant loss, loss along the edge of an initial defect, and the location of sealant loss. Results: Overall, there were significantly (P , .05) more teeth with sealant loss in the SEP group (38.6%) than in the ETCH group (15.5%). New loss of sealant was significantly (P , .05) more likely in the SEP group (27.2%) than in the ETCH group (2.2%). Of the teeth with new loss of sealant, all (100%) had loss at the edge, and 23% had progressive loss. There was no significant group difference in sealant loss from initial defects. Of the teeth that showed enlargement of initial defects, 91% had loss at the edge and 91% had progressive loss. Conclusions: Using SEP to apply facial sealants results in lower retention rates than using ETCH. The vast majority of sealant loss occurs at the edges. Loss of sealant due to enlargement of an initial defect is highly progressive over time. (Angle Orthod. 2015;85:750-756.)

show abstract

“…Interestingly, in an unrelated study using composites made from these same fillers, it was shown that wear was also reduced with spherical fillers [4]. More recently, these same fillers were used to investigate the effect of filler size on void formation and fracture toughness of experimental composites [12]. The study showed that void formation was enhanced in composites with larger fillers (but the same filler volume), from a low of 0.27 % voids for a composite with a trimodal distribution of irregular and spherical fillers to a high of 3.53 % for a composite with a unimodal distribution of 1500-nm irregular fillers.…”

Section: Surface Finishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Ferracane

Pfeifer

Hilton

2014

Curr Oral Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental resin composites have become the primary choice of most practitioners for the direct restoration of teeth owing to their esthetics and properties, both of which are highly dependent upon the microstructure of the materials. The type, size, amount, and distribution of the reinforcing fillers are all critical determinants of the optical and physical properties of the composite. The chemistry of the resin monomers and the quality of the highly cross-linked network formed during the polymerization reaction significantly influences these properties. Finally, the transfer of stress from the weaker resin matrix to the stronger and stiffer reinforcing fillers is accomplished by ensuring a strong interfacial linkage between the two phases, typically via a silane coupling agent. Recent work characterizing and describing the influence of the microstructure of dental composites on their properties and performance are reviewed in this manuscript.

show abstract

Filler size of resin-composites, percentage of voids and fracture toughness: is there a correlation?

Cited by 36 publications

References 22 publications

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

Mechanical Strength and Wear of Dental Glass-Ionomer and Resin Composites Affected by Porosity and Chemical Composition

Retention of sealants during orthodontic treatment: An in vitro comparison of two etching protocols

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About