Cargando…

Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins

BACKGROUND: The radiopacity of composite resins has been considered as an important requirement, improving the radiographic diagnosis. AIM: The present study aimed to compare the radiopacity of eight different composite materials using an aluminum step wedge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight different c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gul, Pinar, Çaglayan, Fatma, Akgul, Nilgün, Akgul, Hayati Murat
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761247
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.209071
_version_ 1783250886205636608
author Gul, Pinar
Çaglayan, Fatma
Akgul, Nilgün
Akgul, Hayati Murat
author_facet Gul, Pinar
Çaglayan, Fatma
Akgul, Nilgün
Akgul, Hayati Murat
author_sort Gul, Pinar
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The radiopacity of composite resins has been considered as an important requirement, improving the radiographic diagnosis. AIM: The present study aimed to compare the radiopacity of eight different composite materials using an aluminum step wedge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight different composite resins were used in this study. The samples were prepared using a stainless steel mold (2 × 8), and a 2-mm-thickness horizontal section was obtained from the freshly extracted molar tooth. Three different radiographs were taken by establishing standard conditions. Mean gray values were obtained by taking three measurements from each step of both the tooth and the aluminum step wedge, and the aluminum thickness equivalents were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way variance analysis and Tukey's test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: All aluminum thickness equivalents were found to be higher than those of the enamel and dentin, except Clearfil Majesty Esthetic (2.23 mm ± 0.52 mm) and Filtek Silorane (3.67 mm ± 0.15 mm) (P < 0.05). The Clearfil Majesty Posterior (8.50 mm ± 0.10 mm) and Arabesk Top (8.17 mm ± 0.06 mm) were found to be the most radiopaque composites. CONCLUSION: All composite resin materials tested in this study were confirmed to the International Standards Organization 4049 standards. However, since radiopacity is not the only criterion for clinical use, it is a better approach to take all other properties of the materials into consideration.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5514803
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55148032017-07-31 Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins Gul, Pinar Çaglayan, Fatma Akgul, Nilgün Akgul, Hayati Murat J Conserv Dent Original Research Article BACKGROUND: The radiopacity of composite resins has been considered as an important requirement, improving the radiographic diagnosis. AIM: The present study aimed to compare the radiopacity of eight different composite materials using an aluminum step wedge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eight different composite resins were used in this study. The samples were prepared using a stainless steel mold (2 × 8), and a 2-mm-thickness horizontal section was obtained from the freshly extracted molar tooth. Three different radiographs were taken by establishing standard conditions. Mean gray values were obtained by taking three measurements from each step of both the tooth and the aluminum step wedge, and the aluminum thickness equivalents were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way variance analysis and Tukey's test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: All aluminum thickness equivalents were found to be higher than those of the enamel and dentin, except Clearfil Majesty Esthetic (2.23 mm ± 0.52 mm) and Filtek Silorane (3.67 mm ± 0.15 mm) (P < 0.05). The Clearfil Majesty Posterior (8.50 mm ± 0.10 mm) and Arabesk Top (8.17 mm ± 0.06 mm) were found to be the most radiopaque composites. CONCLUSION: All composite resin materials tested in this study were confirmed to the International Standards Organization 4049 standards. However, since radiopacity is not the only criterion for clinical use, it is a better approach to take all other properties of the materials into consideration. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5514803/ /pubmed/28761247 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.209071 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Gul, Pinar
Çaglayan, Fatma
Akgul, Nilgün
Akgul, Hayati Murat
Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title_full Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title_fullStr Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title_short Comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
title_sort comparison of radiopacity of different composite resins
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5514803/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28761247
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.209071
work_keys_str_mv AT gulpinar comparisonofradiopacityofdifferentcompositeresins
AT caglayanfatma comparisonofradiopacityofdifferentcompositeresins
AT akgulnilgun comparisonofradiopacityofdifferentcompositeresins
AT akgulhayatimurat comparisonofradiopacityofdifferentcompositeresins