Cargando…

Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study

AIM: Resin composite (RC) are commonly used under full crowns. However, independent information is lacking to guide practitioners regarding core RC material selection. This study aimed at comparing the flexural properties of a large selection of commercially-available core build-up RCs (CBU-RC), eit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spinhayer, L., Bui, A.T.B., Leprince, J.G., Hardy, C.M.F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7646551/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33210097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1838283
_version_ 1783606812458614784
author Spinhayer, L.
Bui, A.T.B.
Leprince, J.G.
Hardy, C.M.F.
author_facet Spinhayer, L.
Bui, A.T.B.
Leprince, J.G.
Hardy, C.M.F.
author_sort Spinhayer, L.
collection PubMed
description AIM: Resin composite (RC) are commonly used under full crowns. However, independent information is lacking to guide practitioners regarding core RC material selection. This study aimed at comparing the flexural properties of a large selection of commercially-available core build-up RCs (CBU-RC), either light-, self- or dual-cure, to conventional light-cure RCs. METHODS: RCs were injected into a 25 × 2×2mm Teflon mold, and either light-cured during 20 s (materials with claimed light-cure characteristics) or covered by aluminum during 10 min (dual- and self-cure CBU-RCs). They were subjected after a one-week water storage at 37.5 °C to three-point bending, and Flexural modulus (E(flex)) and Flexural Strength (σ(f)) were calculated (n = 20). Thermogravimetric analysis (n = 3) was performed to determine inorganic filler content (%). RESULTS: For dual-cure CBU-RCs, both RC (p < .0001) and light-curing (p = .0007) had a significant influence on E(flex), while only RC was significant for σ(f) (p < .0001). Between all conventional RCs and CBU-RCs, significant differences were observed (p < .0001), both regarding E(flex) and σ(f), with values ranging from 3.9 to 15.5 GPa and from 76 to 130.3 MPa, respectively. Higher E(flex) values were observed for light-cure RCs than for self- and dual-cure ones, while no clear trend was noticed regarding σ(f). Good linear correlation was found between inorganic filler content and E(flex) (R(2)=0.85, p < .0001), but not with σ(f) (R(2)=0.08, p = .1609). CONCLUSION: This work demonstrated a positive influence of light-curing on dual-cure CBU-RC’s E(flex). It also highlighted large differences in flexural properties (especially E(flex)) among the investigated materials, questioning the use of some CBU-RCs as dentin replacement in case of large tissue loss.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7646551
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76465512020-11-17 Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study Spinhayer, L. Bui, A.T.B. Leprince, J.G. Hardy, C.M.F. Biomater Investig Dent Original Article AIM: Resin composite (RC) are commonly used under full crowns. However, independent information is lacking to guide practitioners regarding core RC material selection. This study aimed at comparing the flexural properties of a large selection of commercially-available core build-up RCs (CBU-RC), either light-, self- or dual-cure, to conventional light-cure RCs. METHODS: RCs were injected into a 25 × 2×2mm Teflon mold, and either light-cured during 20 s (materials with claimed light-cure characteristics) or covered by aluminum during 10 min (dual- and self-cure CBU-RCs). They were subjected after a one-week water storage at 37.5 °C to three-point bending, and Flexural modulus (E(flex)) and Flexural Strength (σ(f)) were calculated (n = 20). Thermogravimetric analysis (n = 3) was performed to determine inorganic filler content (%). RESULTS: For dual-cure CBU-RCs, both RC (p < .0001) and light-curing (p = .0007) had a significant influence on E(flex), while only RC was significant for σ(f) (p < .0001). Between all conventional RCs and CBU-RCs, significant differences were observed (p < .0001), both regarding E(flex) and σ(f), with values ranging from 3.9 to 15.5 GPa and from 76 to 130.3 MPa, respectively. Higher E(flex) values were observed for light-cure RCs than for self- and dual-cure ones, while no clear trend was noticed regarding σ(f). Good linear correlation was found between inorganic filler content and E(flex) (R(2)=0.85, p < .0001), but not with σ(f) (R(2)=0.08, p = .1609). CONCLUSION: This work demonstrated a positive influence of light-curing on dual-cure CBU-RC’s E(flex). It also highlighted large differences in flexural properties (especially E(flex)) among the investigated materials, questioning the use of some CBU-RCs as dentin replacement in case of large tissue loss. Taylor & Francis 2020-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7646551/ /pubmed/33210097 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1838283 Text en © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. https://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/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Spinhayer, L.
Bui, A.T.B.
Leprince, J.G.
Hardy, C.M.F.
Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title_full Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title_fullStr Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title_full_unstemmed Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title_short Core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
title_sort core build-up resin composites: an in-vitro comparative study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7646551/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33210097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/26415275.2020.1838283
work_keys_str_mv AT spinhayerl corebuildupresincompositesaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT buiatb corebuildupresincompositesaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT leprincejg corebuildupresincompositesaninvitrocomparativestudy
AT hardycmf corebuildupresincompositesaninvitrocomparativestudy