Photoelastic evaluation of the effect of composite formulation on polymerization shrinkage stress

Oliveira, Karla Mychellyne Costa; Consani, Símonídes; Gonçalves, Luciano de Souza; Brandt, William Cunha; Ccahuana-Vásquez, Renzo Alberto

doi:10.1590/s1806-83242012000300004

Cited by 13 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Teeth restored using composite resins are especially prone to this phenomenon due to stress generated within the tooth-restoration interface following resin contraction during polymerization, known as polymerization shrinkage 2 . Should the accumulated polymerization contraction stress result in tooth-composite adhesive failure [3][4] , bacterial aggregation at the disrupted tooth-restoration margin may occur resulting in microleakage and later secondary caries. Furthermore, bonding on the cervical surface of Class II composite restorations is complex.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microleakage in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations in MOD cavities

Tolidis¹,

Boutsiouki²,

Gerasimou³

2013

Braz. J. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To compare marginal seal at tooth-material and material-material interfaces in the proximal box in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations. Methods: Mesio-occlusal-distal (MOD) cavities were prepared in 35 premolars and permanent molars with carbide bur. The distal proximal box was restored with amalgam (Permite, SDI) until reaching the height of pulpal floor. Dental tissues were etched with 37% acid and a bonding agent (Bond 1-SF, Pentron) was applied and cured. Composite resin (Filtek Z250, 3M-ESPE) was placed in layers in the mesial proximal box and occlusally, and light cured. Marginal adaptation was evaluated at the following interfaces: amalgam-tooth (A), amalgam-composite resin (AC) and composite resin-tooth (C). Microleakage was evaluated by means of methylene blue infiltration after 7-day water storage and thermocycling regimen (1500 cycles). Microleakage was assessed as percentage depth of horizontal dye penetration. Results: ANOVA showed statistically significant difference between A-AC and A-C (p<0.01). No statistically significant difference was found between AC-C interfaces (p>0.05). Mean microleakage values were A (73.529/28.71), AC (34.118/34.6) and C (40.435/ 34.965), according to Tukey's test. Conclusions: Although the bonding mechanism between amalgam and composite has not yet been completely explained, amalgam/composite resin interface exhibited the lowest microleakage scores. Since amalgam/composite resin restorations exhibited lower microleakage scores than composite resin on the cervical surface, combined restorations can be considered as a biological and aesthetic alternative to conventional Class II composite or amalgam restorations.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microleakage in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations in MOD cavities

Tolidis¹,

Boutsiouki²,

Gerasimou³

2013

Braz. J. Oral Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering that the insertion/light activation technique was also a bulk increment and immediate light activation for 40 s, one could infer that the C-factor had less influence on this composite, confirming its lower degree of polymerization shrinkage 6,13,18,20,27 . It is suggested that the adhesive system of P90, although leading to lower bond strength means, is not subject to the same stress at the bond interface, since there is a lower degree of volumetric shrinkage of the composite.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Polymerization shrinkage is an intrinsic property of the resin matrix 18 , which has been undesirably ascribed to problems associated with failures in posterior teeth resin composite restorations. These failures may be cohesive fracture of enamel prisms and microgap formation, with rupture of adhesive bonds and consequent withdrawal of the restorative material from the cavity walls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of bond strength of silorane and methacrylate based restorative systems to dentin using different cavity models

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength (µTBS) to dentin of two different restorative systems: silorane-based (P90), and methacrylate-based (P60), using two cavity models.Material and MethodsOcclusal enamel of 40 human third molars was removed to expose flat dentin surface. Class I cavities with 4 mm mesial-distal width, 3 mm buccal-lingual width and 3 mm depth (C-factor=4.5) were prepared in 20 teeth, which were divided into two groups (n=10) restored with P60 and P90, bulk-filled after dentin treatment according to manufacturer's instructions. Flat buccal dentin surfaces were prepared in the 20 remaining teeth (C-factor=0.2) and restored with resin blocks measuring 4x3x3 mm using the two restorative systems (n=10). The teeth were sectioned into samples with area between 0.85 and 1.25 mm2 that were submitted to µTBS testing, using a universal testing machine (EMIC) at speed of 0.5 mm/min. Fractured specimens were analyzed under stereomicroscope and categorized according to fracture pattern. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey Kramer tests.ResultsFor flat surfaces, P60 obtained higher bond strength values compared with P90. However, for Class I cavities, P60 showed significant reduction in bond strength (p<0.05). No statistical difference between restorative systems was shown for Class I cavity model (p>0.05), or between Class I Cavity and Flat Surface group, considering P90 restorative system (p>0.05). Regarding fracture pattern, there was no statistical difference among groups (p=0.0713) and 56.3% of the fractures were adhesive.ConclusionIt was concluded that methacrylate-based composite µTBS was influenced by cavity models, and the use of silorane-based composite led to similar bond strength values compared to the methacrylate-based composite in cavities with high C-factor.

show abstract

“…It may act alone or in combination with CQ, characterizing a synergetic and simultaneous action on formation of free radicals, which could favor the performance of materials with resinous base (6), since the PPD presents maximum peak of absorption in the ultraviolet region (UV -390 nm) (7). In this way, composites with PPD as initiator tend to reach the maximum values of polymerization slower than the ones with camphorquinone, because the rate and the speed of polymerization depend on the energy density absorbed by the composite (8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Photoinitiator on Accelerated Artificial Aging and Bond Strength of Experimental Resin Cements

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study was to evaluate in vitro the effect of the photoinitiator phenylpropanedione (PPD), alone or combined with camphorquinone (CQ), on color stability of photoactivated resin cements and their bond strength to ceramics using a micro-shear test. Four resin cements were used: a commercial brand cement (RelyX Veneer®) and 3 experimental cements with different types and concentration of photoinitiators. For color analysis, ceramic discs were cemented on bovine dentin specimens to simulate indirect restorations (n=8) and were exposed to UV for 120 h and tested for color alteration using a reflectance spectrophotometer and the CIEL*a*b* system. Data were analyzed by Anova and Tukey's test at 5% significance level. The color test results did not present statistically significant difference for the ∆E for all the studied cements, neither for ∆L, ∆a and ∆b. For the bond strength, all the studied cements showed statistically significant differences to each other, with the highest result for the RelyX Veneer® (29.07 MPa) cement, followed by the cement with CQ (21.74 MPa) and CQ+PPD (19.09 MPa) cement; the lowest result was obtained by the cement using only PPD as a photoinitiator (13.99 MPa). So, based on the studied parameters, PPD was not advantageous as photoinitiator of resin cements, because it showed a low value of bond strength to the ceramics and no superior color stability.

show abstract

Photoelastic evaluation of the effect of composite formulation on polymerization shrinkage stress

Cited by 13 publications

References 16 publications

Microleakage in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations in MOD cavities

Microleakage in combined amalgam/composite resin restorations in MOD cavities

Evaluation of bond strength of silorane and methacrylate based restorative systems to dentin using different cavity models

Influence of Photoinitiator on Accelerated Artificial Aging and Bond Strength of Experimental Resin Cements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About