Relationship Between Subsurface Damage and Wear of Dental Restorative Composites

McKinney, John E.; Wu, Wen Li

doi:10.1177/00220345820610091101

Cited by 97 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Water uptake is higher in materials that contain TEGDMA as a sole diluent monomer 27) , as is the case for RX cement 29) . The solvent effect is higher when a minimal solubility parameter mismatch is present between the solvent and the polymer itself 9,30,31) . Higher diffusion coefficients (D), in molecular terms, could result in a lower degree of crosslinking and a more rapid uptake of water 5) , which is, in fact, in accordance with the results obtained for RX.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of curing protocols on fluid kinetics and hardness of resin cements

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of polymerization protocols on water sorption/solubility, the diffusion coefficient (D), the flux (J), and the hardness (KH) of two resin cements were evaluated. The materials were manipulated and divided into three groups (n=6) according to the curing protocol: PA=photoactivation (40 s); DP=delayed photoactivation (10 min self-curing plus 40 s photoactivated); CA=chemical activation. After desiccation, the specimens were weighed, stored in water (37ºC), evaluated over 28-days, and hardness recorded. Chemical activation resulted in lower net water uptake, D, and J for RelyX ARC (RX). For Variolink II (VL), CA yielded equivalent D and lower J; however, photoactivation resulted in lower net water uptake. Hardness of VL was less affected by the water storage, irrespective of the polymerization protocol. Considering the water diffusion parameters, VL demonstrated immediate photoactivation dependence; for RX, a chemical activation. Different polymerization protocols affect the fluid kinetics and the hardness of the resin cements tested.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of curing protocols on fluid kinetics and hardness of resin cements

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[18][19] The matrix can be softened and filler components can be lost. [20][21][22][23] Alcohol-containing solutions, which are frequently used during supportive maintenance care, can also negatively influence the mechanical and physical properties of the resin composite materials. 24 Another important issue is the problem of postoperative sensitivity, which has always been a major point of concern when using direct composite restorations under clinical situations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-year Evaluation of Posterior Vertical Bite Reconstruction Using Direct Resin Composite–A Case Series

Schmidlin¹,

Filli²,

Imfeld³

et al. 2009

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The occlusion of extensively worn teeth can be restored using direct resin composite materials. The quality over a mean observation period of three years is good. The proposed method, using a wax-up-based template, can help the clinician to restore the occlusal anatomy and function. SUMMARYThe use of resin composite materials to restore the complete occlusion of worn teeth is controversial and data are scarce. In this case series, the authors report on seven cases of progressive mixed erosive/abrasive worn dentition (85 posterior teeth) that have been reconstructed with direct resin composite restorations.In all patients, either one or both tooth arches was completely restored using direct resin composite restorations. All patients were treated with standardized materials and protocols. In five patients, a wax-up-based template was used to avoid freehand build-up techniques and to ensure optimal anatomy and function. All patients were re-assessed after a mean service time of three years (mean 35 ± 5 months) using USPHS criteria. Subjective patient satisfaction was measured using visual analogue scales (VAS).The overall quality of the restorations was good, with predominantly determined "Alpha"-scores. Only the marginal quality showed small deteriorations, with "Beta" scores of 37% and 45% for marginal discoloration and integrity, respec- tively. In general, the composite showed signs of wear facets that resulted in 46% "Beta" scores within the anatomy scores. Small restoration fractures were only seen in two restorations, which were reparable. Two teeth were excluded from the evaluation, as they have been previously repaired due to fracture after biting on a nut.The results were very favorable, and the patients were satisfied with this non-invasive and economic treatment option, which still has the characteristic of a medium-term rehabilitation. The outcomes were comparable to other direct composite restorations successfully applied in adhesive dentistry.

show abstract

“…Stainless steel abraders were used for the reasons given by McKinney and Wu. 12 Briefly, enamel or enamel-like abraders are very hard and tend to polish composite surface producing little wear. Softer abraders, like stainless steel, are abraded by the hard inorganic fillers producing a rough contact surface, which theoretically wears the resin matrix preferentially.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of water exposure on three-body wear of composite restoratives

Yap

Teoh

Tan

2000

J. Biomed. Mater. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this investigation was to study the influence of water exposure on the three-body wear of composite restoratives. A three-body wear instrumentation was used to investigate the wear resistance of five composite restoratives [Silux Plus (SX), Z100 (ZO), Ariston pHc (AR), Surefil (SF) and Tetric Ceram (TC)] with and without exposure to water. An amalgam alloy [Dispersalloy (DA)] was used as control. Ten specimens were made for each material. The specimens were conditioned in artificial saliva at 37 degrees C for 24 h and randomly divided into two groups of 5. The first group was subjected to wear testing immediately after the 24 h conditioning period, while the second group was conditioned in distilled water at 37 degrees C for 7 days prior to wear testing. All materials were wear tested at 15 N contact force against SS304 counter-bodies for 20,000 cycles with millet seed slurry as third-body. Wear depth (microm) was measured using profilometry, and results were analyzed by ANOVA/Scheffe's and independent sample t-tests at significance level 0.05. Ranking of wear resistance was as follows: without water exposure: DA > ZO > SF > AR > SX > TC; with water exposure: DA > ZO > SX > SF > AR > TC. Wear factor ranged from 2.20 for ZO to 7.13 for TC without water exposure and from 46.00 for ZO to 143.00 for TC with exposure to water. Exposure to water significantly increased three-body wear for all composite restoratives, but did not affect wear of the amalgam alloy. The effects of water exposure must be considered for the evaluation of wear in all polymeric composite restoratives.

show abstract

Relationship Between Subsurface Damage and Wear of Dental Restorative Composites

Cited by 97 publications

References 7 publications

Effects of curing protocols on fluid kinetics and hardness of resin cements

Effects of curing protocols on fluid kinetics and hardness of resin cements

Three-year Evaluation of Posterior Vertical Bite Reconstruction Using Direct Resin Composite–A Case Series

Influence of water exposure on three-body wear of composite restoratives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About