Surface Texture and Optical Properties of Self-Adhering Composite Materials after Toothbrush Abrasion

Abstract

This study evaluated the surface texture and optical properties of two self-adhering composites and a nanofilled composite before and after toothbrush abrasion. Vertise Flow (Kerr), Fusio Liquid (Pentron Clinical) and Filtek Z350 XT (3M ESPE) composites were divided into 3 groups (n = 6). Disks of 12 mm diameter and 2 mm thick were made. All materials were light-cured with a LED light source for 40 seconds. Analyses of surface roughness, gloss retention and color stability were performed 24 hours after light curing and after 20,000 brushing cycles. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test (α = 5%).Results: Tukey´s test ascertained that toothbrush abrasion resulted in rougher and matte surfaces for all composites tested. Filtek Z350 presented better gloss retention after abrasion. On surface roughness evaluation, there was no statistical difference between Fusio Liquid Dentin and Filtek Z350 resins (p > 0.05). Vertise Flow resin showed better color stability (ΔE), than the other two materials.Conclusion: Nanofilled material presented better gloss retention but it did not produce the best results in aspects related to surface roughness and color stability compared to self-adhering composites.

Clinical efficacy of novel self-adhesive flowable composite resin restoration: in vivo study

“…Çelik et al [18], and Malavasi et al [26]. However, at 12 months, statistical analysis showed that Fusio Liquid Dentin showed statistically higher prevalence of score 1 and lower prevalence of score 2 than Flow-It ® .…”

Trends in restorative composites research: what is in the future?

“…31 After toothbrushing abrasion, Vertise flow had a rougher surface compared to that resulting from the application of Fusio liquid dentin and a conventional restorative composite. 32 Results can be related to the type of organic matrix, since urethane-based composites have a better wear resistance than Bis-GMA-based composites, other factors being equal. 33 SACs also showed a much poorer performance in terms of gloss retention than a conventional control.…”

“…33 SACs also showed a much poorer performance in terms of gloss retention than a conventional control. 32 Self-adhesive composites are more hydrophilic than conventional composites due to the presence of acidic monomers and HEMA. In fact, Vertise Flow showed much higher hygroscopic expansion 34 and higher water sorption 35 when compared with conventional composites after 150 days in water.…”

Influence of Photoinitiator System on Physical-Chemical Properties of Experimental Self-Adhesive Composites

“…Mainly used as liner or as repair material, they could also be applied as filling material in conservative preparations (2). The current novelty in adhesive dentistry is the development of self-adhesive flowable composites (SAFCs) to reduce the clinical time and to decrease the technique sensitivity (3).…”

“…The current novelty in adhesive dentistry is the development of self-adhesive flowable composites (SAFCs) to reduce the clinical time and to decrease the technique sensitivity (3). The SAFCs formulation is based on both conventional methacrylate system and acidic monomers bonding technology derived from self-etching adhesive systems (2). The acidic functional monomers are predominantly methacrylate acid-derivatives, such as 4-methacryloxyethyl anhydride trimellitate acid (4-META), or phosphonate monomers derivatives, such as 2-methacryloxyethyl phenyl phosphate (phenyl-P), methacryloyloxydecyl dihydrogen phosphate (10-MDP), and bis [2-(methacryloyloxy) ethyl] phosphate (2MP) (4).…”