Cargando…

Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry

Purpose. This study tested the null hypothesis that different classes of direct restorative dental materials: silorane-based resin, low-shrinkage and conventional (non-flowable and flowable) resin-based composite (RBC) do not differ from each other with regard to polymerization shrinkage, depth of c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Maia, Rodrigo R., Reis, Rodrigo S., Moro, André F.V., Perez, Cesar R., Pessôa, Bárbara M., Dias, Katia R.H.C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26082866
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.864
_version_ 1782376151743725568
author Maia, Rodrigo R.
Reis, Rodrigo S.
Moro, André F.V.
Perez, Cesar R.
Pessôa, Bárbara M.
Dias, Katia R.H.C.
author_facet Maia, Rodrigo R.
Reis, Rodrigo S.
Moro, André F.V.
Perez, Cesar R.
Pessôa, Bárbara M.
Dias, Katia R.H.C.
author_sort Maia, Rodrigo R.
collection PubMed
description Purpose. This study tested the null hypothesis that different classes of direct restorative dental materials: silorane-based resin, low-shrinkage and conventional (non-flowable and flowable) resin-based composite (RBC) do not differ from each other with regard to polymerization shrinkage, depth of cure or microhardness. Methods. 140 RBC samples were fabricated and tested by one calibrated operator. Polymerization shrinkage was measured using a gas pycnometer both before and immediately after curing with 36 J/cm(2) light energy density. Depth of cure was determined, using a penetrometer and the Knoop microhardness was tested from the top surface to a depth of 5 mm. Results. Considering polymerization shrinkage, the authors found significant differences (p < 0.05) between different materials: non-flowable RBCs showed lower values compared to flowable RBCs, with the silorane-based resin presenting the smallest shrinkage. The low shrinkage flowable composite performed similarly to non-flowable with significant statistical differences compared to the two other flowable RBCs. Regarding to depth of cure, low-shrinkage flowable RBC, were most effective compared to other groups. Microhardness was generally higher for the non-flowable vs. flowable RBCs (p < 0.05). However, the values for low-shrinkage flowable did not differ significantly from those of non-flowable, but were significantly higher than those of the other flowable RBCs. Clinical Significance. RBCs have undergone many modifications as they have evolved and represent the most relevant restorative materials in today’s dental practice. This study of low-shrinkage RBCs, conventional RBCs (non-flowable and flowable) and silorane-based composite—by in vitro evaluation of volumetric shrinkage, depth of cure and microhardness—reveals that although filler content is an important determinant of polymerization shrinkage, it is not the only variable that affects properties of materials that were tested in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4465949
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44659492015-06-16 Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry Maia, Rodrigo R. Reis, Rodrigo S. Moro, André F.V. Perez, Cesar R. Pessôa, Bárbara M. Dias, Katia R.H.C. PeerJ Dentistry Purpose. This study tested the null hypothesis that different classes of direct restorative dental materials: silorane-based resin, low-shrinkage and conventional (non-flowable and flowable) resin-based composite (RBC) do not differ from each other with regard to polymerization shrinkage, depth of cure or microhardness. Methods. 140 RBC samples were fabricated and tested by one calibrated operator. Polymerization shrinkage was measured using a gas pycnometer both before and immediately after curing with 36 J/cm(2) light energy density. Depth of cure was determined, using a penetrometer and the Knoop microhardness was tested from the top surface to a depth of 5 mm. Results. Considering polymerization shrinkage, the authors found significant differences (p < 0.05) between different materials: non-flowable RBCs showed lower values compared to flowable RBCs, with the silorane-based resin presenting the smallest shrinkage. The low shrinkage flowable composite performed similarly to non-flowable with significant statistical differences compared to the two other flowable RBCs. Regarding to depth of cure, low-shrinkage flowable RBC, were most effective compared to other groups. Microhardness was generally higher for the non-flowable vs. flowable RBCs (p < 0.05). However, the values for low-shrinkage flowable did not differ significantly from those of non-flowable, but were significantly higher than those of the other flowable RBCs. Clinical Significance. RBCs have undergone many modifications as they have evolved and represent the most relevant restorative materials in today’s dental practice. This study of low-shrinkage RBCs, conventional RBCs (non-flowable and flowable) and silorane-based composite—by in vitro evaluation of volumetric shrinkage, depth of cure and microhardness—reveals that although filler content is an important determinant of polymerization shrinkage, it is not the only variable that affects properties of materials that were tested in this study. PeerJ Inc. 2015-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4465949/ /pubmed/26082866 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.864 Text en © 2015 Maia et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Dentistry
Maia, Rodrigo R.
Reis, Rodrigo S.
Moro, André F.V.
Perez, Cesar R.
Pessôa, Bárbara M.
Dias, Katia R.H.C.
Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title_full Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title_fullStr Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title_full_unstemmed Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title_short Properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
title_sort properties evaluation of silorane, low-shrinkage, non-flowable and flowable resin-based composites in dentistry
topic Dentistry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465949/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26082866
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.864
work_keys_str_mv AT maiarodrigor propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry
AT reisrodrigos propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry
AT moroandrefv propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry
AT perezcesarr propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry
AT pessoabarbaram propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry
AT diaskatiarhc propertiesevaluationofsiloranelowshrinkagenonflowableandflowableresinbasedcompositesindentistry