Radiopacity of composite dental materials using a digital X-ray system

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the radiopacity of 32 current dental composite materials with digital technique. Digital radiographs with CCD sensor along with an aluminum step wedge, 1-mm-thick tooth slice and 1mm thick composite specimen were taken in five different combinations of exposition/voltage. The radiopacity in pixels was determined using Digora 2.6. software. The equivalent in thickness of aluminum for each material was then calculated from the calibration curve. 74.9% of all tested materials in all exposure combinations had radiopacity between 2 mm and 4 mm aluminum equivalent. The radiopacity of composites ranged from 0.61 mm Al (Gradia Direct Anterior) to 4.78 mm Al (Te-Econom). The average radiopacity for enamel and dentine was 2.05 and 1.11 mm Al. The use of digital technique for radiopacity is an easy, reliable, fast and precise way to analyze different dental materials. Most of the tested composite materials fulfill the requested criteria for radiopacity with a few exceptions.

Influence of Radiopacity of Dental Composites on the Diagnosis of Secondary Caries: The Correlation Between Objective and Subjective Analyses

“…In the current study, all materials conformed to these guidelines. Other studies 1,5,10 related that currently the composite materials have presented an appropriate radiopacity to the guidelines, despite a wide range of radiopacity, as observed in the current study as well. These wide ranges of radiopacity occur principally as a result of different kinds and proportions by volume of radiopacifying agents, considering the diversity of the manufacturers.…”

“…There are those studies 1,[4][5][6][10][11][12] that conducted this evaluation using objective analysis, comparing the image of materials to a reference image, and other studies 2,3,7,13-15 that made this evaluation by means of subjective analysis, comparing the observers' performance to a specific diagnosis. In this in vitro study, both analyses, objective and subjective, were used.…”

“…Variations in radiopacity values of the same restorative materials among different studies can already occur because there are many methodological factors, such as those relating to film, X-ray machines, radiographic processing, and image analysis, that could induce such ranges. 10 Another important factor to be considered is the pureness of the Al wedge used in the conversion unit, considering the different alloys used as potent filtering objects for radiation; any alloy changes, related to a contaminating agent with a higher or lower atomic number, can significantly modify the radiation spectrum and result in a different image. 16 In the current study, the Al wedge had 99.8% purity, similar to the alloy used in the tube of the X-ray machine, such as Al X-ray filters.…”

Reinforcement of flowable dental composites with titanium dioxide nanotubes

“…The radiopacity values ranged between 1.14 and 3.57 mm Al. Dukic and coworkers [130] reported the radiopacity for 32 dental composites (including both microfilled and nanohydrid). The radiopacity ranged from 0.61 to 4.78 mm Al.…”

Comparative Evaluation of the Radiopacity of Bone Graft Materials used in Dentistry

“…8 In the transmission densitometer, the obtained optical density is a logarithmic measure of the ratio of JCD transmitted to incident light through the film image. 9 Radiopacity is usually expressed in terms of aluminum thickness and many researchers use aluminum stepwedges to compare the radiopacity of restorative materials under typical radiographic conditions. 7,10 The aim of the present study is to detect the radiopacity of commercially available BGMs in cadavers' mandibles to mimic the in vivo conditions and compare them with each other and bone tissue.…”