Properties of Hybrid Resin Composite Systems Containing Prepolymerized Filler Particles

Blackham, Jason T; Vandewalle, Kraig S; Lien, Wen

doi:10.2341/08-118-l

Cited by 88 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EF was significantly harder than CFR, as was noted in another study (6). Microhardness was significantly lower for PC than for the GICs, which accords with the findings of previous studies (21,22). The relatively low hardness of CFR in this study could be due to filler size and morphology (11) or to insufficient dispersion of zinc and glass particles.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material (ChemFil Rock) with three commercially available glass ionomer cements (GICs), namely, Fuji IX GP Extra, Ketac Molar Quick Aplicap, and EQUIA Fil, with respect to fracture toughness, microhardness, roughness, and abrasive wear. Fracture toughness (K IC ) was tested according to ISO 13586 (n = 10). Hardness, roughness, and abrasive wear were also tested (n = 9). Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test with adjustment for multiple comparisons (α = 0.05). As compared with the other GICs ChemFil Rock exhibited a greater increase in surface roughness (P < 0.05) and lower microhardness (P < 0.01). The wear resistance of ChemFil Rock was comparable to that of the other GICs (P > 0.05). ChemFil Rock had significantly lower fracture toughness as compared with EQUIA Fil (P = 0.01) and significantly higher fracture toughness as compared with the other GICs (P < 0.02). In conclusion, as compared with the three other commercially available GICs, ChemFil Rock had intermediate fracture toughness, the lowest microhardness, and the greatest change in surface roughness. (J Oral Sci 56, 11-16, 2014)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The literature shows a high success rate for direct restorations with composite resin, provided they comply with the principles of restoration fabrication. It is observed 95% success rate for restorations class III and 90% for Class IV restorations after 10 years [16]. The most recent innovation in the development of composites has been the "nanofill" composites, containing only nanoscale particles.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For success and longevity in this treatment, professionals should consider the type of composite resin, methods and materials to hybridization the tooth structure (enamel etching, self-etching, no etching), and the operative procedure (beveling of enamel margin, rubber dam application) [16]. The literature shows a high success rate for direct restorations with composite resin, provided they comply with the principles of restoration fabrication.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of direct composite resin restorations as treatment plan is based in the literature for their good properties and clinical performance [16]. For success and longevity in this treatment, professionals should consider the type of composite resin, methods and materials to hybridization the tooth structure (enamel etching, self-etching, no etching), and the operative procedure (beveling of enamel margin, rubber dam application) [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conservative Technique for Restoration of Anterior Teeth: Clinical Case Report

Novais¹

2017

JDHODT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work aims to present a technique for resolving cases with aesthetic requirements using guides that facilitates the implementation of restorative procedures without the need for high manual sculpture skill to dental professional and reduced time. Fractures and wear tooth, poor dental position, trauma and dissatisfaction aesthetics are the major causes of seeking patients by the dentist. All these problems could be rehabilitated with indirect or direct restorations. The choice of the ideal material should consider some factors, such as the rehabilitation area, space available, the aesthetical potential of each material, the translucency of the adjacent teeth, type of reminiscent and antagonist that occlude with the new restoration. Direct restorations have good predictability, resistance load, longevity and compared with indirect restorations have greater preservation of dental tissues, low cost and fewer clinical sessions. However, restorative aesthetic works mainly require skill and practice of the dentist. The clinical case shows an alternative technique for performing aesthetic rehabilitation treatment with direct restorations with resin composite. The described technique was an excellent choice to ensure proper sculpture and anatomy of the anterior teeth. Respecting the principles of adhesion and operative procedures for performing direct restorations was possible to obtain an aesthetic and functional result favorable in less time.

show abstract

“…Current evidence seems to point in the direction of lower mechanical properties for most nanohybrid composites [20]. These materials typically incorporate pre-polymerized resin fillers (PPRF) that reduce overall monomer content to reduce shrinkage, but are not as strong as solid glass-reinforcing fillers.…”

Section: Fracture Toughness and Fatigue Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Ferracane

Pfeifer

Hilton

2014

Curr Oral Health Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dental resin composites have become the primary choice of most practitioners for the direct restoration of teeth owing to their esthetics and properties, both of which are highly dependent upon the microstructure of the materials. The type, size, amount, and distribution of the reinforcing fillers are all critical determinants of the optical and physical properties of the composite. The chemistry of the resin monomers and the quality of the highly cross-linked network formed during the polymerization reaction significantly influences these properties. Finally, the transfer of stress from the weaker resin matrix to the stronger and stiffer reinforcing fillers is accomplished by ensuring a strong interfacial linkage between the two phases, typically via a silane coupling agent. Recent work characterizing and describing the influence of the microstructure of dental composites on their properties and performance are reviewed in this manuscript.

show abstract

Properties of Hybrid Resin Composite Systems Containing Prepolymerized Filler Particles

Cited by 88 publications

References 13 publications

Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material

Physicomechanical properties of a zinc-reinforced glass ionomer restorative material

Conservative Technique for Restoration of Anterior Teeth: Clinical Case Report

Microstructural Features of Current Resin Composite Materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About