The paper reviews the environmental factors affecting ageing processes, and the degradation of resins, filler, and the filler-matrix interface. It discusses the current methods of testing materials in vitro. A review of literature was conducted with the main sources being PubMed. ScienceDirect, Mendeley, and Google Scholar were used as other resources. Studies were selected based on relevance, with a preference given to recent research. The ageing process is an inherent element of the use of resin composites in the oral environment, which is very complex and changes dynamically. The hydrolysis of dental resins is accelerated by some substances (enzymes, acids). Bonds formed between coupling agent and inorganic filler are prone to hydrolysis. Methods for prediction of long-term behaviour are not included in composite standards. Given the very complex chemical composition of the oral environment, ageing tests based on water can only provide a limited view of the clinical performance of biomaterial. Systems that can reproduce dynamic changes in stress (thermal cycling, fatigue tests) are better able to mimic clinical conditions and could be extremely valuable in predicting dental composite clinical performance. It is essential to identify procedure to determine the ageing process of dental materials.

The presented paper concerns current knowledge of commercial and alternative photoinitiator systems used in dentistry. It discusses alternative and commercial photoinitiators and focuses on mechanisms of polymerization process, in vitro measurement methods and factors influencing the degree of conversion and hardness of dental resins. PubMed, Academia.edu, Google Scholar, Elsevier, ResearchGate and Mendeley, analysis from 1985 to 2020 were searched electronically with appropriate keywords. Over 60 articles were chosen based on relevance to this review. Dental light-cured composites are the most common filling used in dentistry, but every photoinitiator system requires proper light-curing system with suitable spectrum of light. Alternation of photoinitiator might cause changing the values of biomechanical properties such as: degree of conversion, hardness, biocompatibility. This review contains comparison of biomechanical properties of dental composites including different photosensitizers among other: camphorquinone, phenanthrenequinone, benzophenone and 1-phenyl-1,2 propanedione, trimethylbenzoyl-diphenylphosphine oxide, benzoyl peroxide. The major aim of this article was to point out alternative photoinitiators which would compensate the disadvantages of camphorquinone such as: yellow staining or poor biocompatibility and also would have mechanical properties as satisfactory as camphorquinone. Research showed there is not an adequate photoinitiator which can be as sufficient as camphorquinone (CQ), but alternative photosensitizers like: benzoyl germanium or novel acylphosphine oxide photoinitiators used synergistically with CQ are able to improve aesthetic properties and degree of conversion of dental resin.

The contraction stress generated during the photopolymerization of resin dental composites is the major disadvantage. The water sorption in the oral environment should counteract the contraction stress. The purpose was to evaluate the influence of the water sorption of composite materials on polymerization shrinkage stress generated at the restoration-tooth interface. The following materials were tested: Filtek Ultimate, Gradia Direct LoFlo, Heliomolar Flow, Tetric EvoCeram, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill, Tetric EvoFlow, Tetric EvoFlow Bulk Fill, X-tra Base, Venus BulkFil, and Ceram.X One. The shrinkage stress was measured immediately after curing and after: 0.5 h, 24 h, 72 h, 96 h, 168 h, 240 h, 336 h, 504 h, 672 h, and 1344 h by means of photoelastic study. Moreover, water sorption and solubility were evaluated. Material samples were weighted on scale in time intervals to measure the water absorbency and the dynamic of this process. The tested materials during polymerization generated shrinkage stresses ranging from 6.3 MPa to 12.5 MPa. Upon water conditioning (56 days), the decrease in shrinkage strain (not less than 48%) was observed. The decrease in value stress in time is material-dependent.

Resin matrix dental materials undergo contraction and expansion changes due to polymerization and water absorption. Both phenomena deform resin-dentin bonding and influence the stress state in restored tooth structure in two opposite directions. The study tested three composite resin cements (Cement-It, NX3, Variolink Esthetic DC), three adhesive resin cements (Estecem, Multilink Automix, Panavia 2.0), and seven self-adhesive resin cements (Breeze, Calibra Universal, MaxCem Elite Chroma, Panavia SA Cement Plus, RelyX U200, SmartCem 2, and SpeedCEM Plus). The stress generated at the restoration-tooth interface during water immersion was evaluated. The shrinkage stress was measured immediately after curing and after 0.5 h, 24 h, 72 h, 96 h, 168 h, 240 h, 336 h, 504 h, 672 h, and 1344 h by means of photoelastic study. Water sorption and solubility were also studied. All tested materials during polymerization generated shrinkage stress ranging from 4.8 MPa up to 15.1 MPa. The decrease in shrinkage strain (not less than 57%) was observed after water storage (56 days). Self-adhesive cements, i.e., MaxCem Elite Chroma, SpeedCem Plus, Panavia SA Plus, and Breeze exhibited high values of water expansion stress (from 0 up to almost 7 MPa). Among other tested materials only composite resin cement Cement It and adhesive resin cement Panavia 2.0 showed water expansion stress (1.6 and 4.8, respectively). The changes in stress value (decrease in contraction stress or built up of hydroscopic expansion) in time were material-dependent.

Complex dental components which are individually tailored to the patient can be obtained due to new additive manufacturing technology. This paper reviews the metallic powders used in dental applications, the fabrication process (build orientation, process parameters) and post-processing processes (stress relieving, surface finishing). A review of the literature was performed using PubMed, ScienceDirect, Mendeley and Google Scholar. Over eighty articles were selected based on relevance to this review. This paper attempts to include the latest research from 2010 until 2020, however, older manuscripts (10 articles) were also selected. Over 1200 records were identified through the search; these were screened for title and/or summary. Over eighty articles were selected based on relevance to this review. In order to obtain a product which can be used in clinical applications, the appropriate manufacturing parameters should be selected. A discussion was made on optimal selective laser melting (SLM) parameters in dentistry. In addition, this paper includes a critical review of applied thermal treatment methods for Co–Cr alloys used in dentistry.

Most of the dental materials available on the market are still based on traditional monomers such as bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA), urethane dimethacrylate (UDMA), triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA), and ethoxylated bisphenol-A dimethacrylate (Bis-EMA). The interactions that arise in the monomer mixture and the characteristics of the resulting polymer network are the most important factors, which define the final properties of dental materials. The use of three different monomers in proper proportions may create a strong polymer matrix. In this paper, fourteen resin materials, based on urethane dimethacrylate with different co-monomers such as Bis-GMA or Bis-EMA, were evaluated. TEGDMA was used as the diluting monomer. The flexural strength (FS), diametral tensile strength (DTS), and hardness (HV) were determined. The impacts of material composition on the water absorption and dissolution were evaluated as well. The highest FS was 89.5 MPa, while the lowest was 69.7 MPa. The median DTS for the tested materials was found to range from 20 to 30 MPa. The hardness of the tested materials ranged from 14 to 16 HV. UDMA/TEGDMA matrices were characterized by the highest adsorption values. The overall results indicated that changes in the materials’ properties are not strictly proportional to the material’s compositional changes. The matrices showed good properties when the composite contained an equal mixture of Bis-GMA/Bis-EMA and UDMA or the content of the UDMA monomer was higher.

Ion-releasing polymeric restorative materials seem to be promising solutions, due to their possible anticaries effect. However, acid functional groups (monomers) and glass filler increase hydrophilicity and, supposedly, water sorption. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the influence of water sorption of polymeric materials on the stress state at the restoration-tooth interface. Beautifil Bulk Fill Flow, Beautifil Flow Plus F00, Beautifil Flow F02, Dyract eXtra, Compoglass Flow, Ionosit, Glasiosite, TwinkiStar, Ionolux and Fuji II LC were used for the study. The stress state was measured using photoelastic analysis after: 0.5, 24, 72, 96, 168, 240, 336, 504, 672, 1344 and 2016 h. Moreover, water sorption, solubility and absorption dynamic were assessed. The water sorption, solubility and absorption dynamic of ion-releasing restorative materials are material dependent properties. The overall results indicated that the tested restorative materials showed significant stress decrease. The total reduction in contraction stress and water expansion stress was not observed for materials with low value of water sorption (Beautifil Bulk Fill, Dyract eXtra, Glasionosit and Twinky Star). The photoelastic method turned out to be inadequate to evaluate stress changes of resin modified glass-ionomer cement (RMGI, Fuji II LC and Ionolux).

Aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of filler amounts on mechanical properties and contraction stress of light-curing experimental composite. Hardness, flexural strength, diametral tensile strength of material filled with 40, 50 or 60 wt. % of silanized silica were tested. The contraction stress was measured after 24 h by means of photoelastic study. The addition of 40-60 wt. % filler to composite caused significant increase in hardness, Young’s modulus and flexural strength. The DTS, after incorporating filler into polymer matrix, was valued at ~26 MPa. The composite containing 40 wt. % of filler demonstrated significantly lower contraction stress in comparison to neat resin and filled > 50 wt. % of silica.