The Wettability of Composite Resinous Filling Materials

Glantz, Per‐Olof; Larsson, Lars-Ake

doi:10.3109/00016357109026332

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The water contact angles of all three materials are in line with data previously published (27,28), and for stainless steel the values are in between the ones reported for as received and chemically cleaned 316L stainless steel. Note that stainless steel aggressively cleaned by plasma treatment is much more hydrophilic (29).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Water contact angles on the different materials, in the absence of a salivary conditioning film, varied from 30 ± 1 degrees for enamel to 71 ± 1 degrees for the adhesive, as shown by the results presented in Table 2. The water contact angles of all three materials are in line with data previously published (27, 28), and for stainless steel the values are in between the ones reported for as received and chemically cleaned 316L stainless steel. Note that stainless steel aggressively cleaned by plasma treatment is much more hydrophilic (29).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oral bacterial adhesion forces to biomaterial surfaces constituting the bracket–adhesive–enamel junction in orthodontic treatment

Busscher

Mei

et al. 2009

European J Oral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacterial adhesion to biomaterial surfaces constituting the bracket-adhesive-enamel junction represents a growing problem in orthodontics, because bacteria can adversely affect treatment by causing demineralization of the enamel surface around the brackets. It is important to know the forces with which bacteria adhere to the surfaces of these junction materials, as the strength of these forces will determine how easy it will be to remove the bacteria. We compared the adhesion forces of five initially colonizing and four cariogenic strains of bacteria to an orthodontic adhesive, stainless steel, and enamel, with and without a salivary conditioning film. Adhesion forces were determined using atomic force microscopy and a bacterial probe. In the absence of a salivary conditioning film, the strongest bacterial adhesion forces occurred to the adhesive surface (-2.9 to -6.9 nN), while adhesion forces to the enamel surfaces were lowest (-0.8 to -2.7 nN). In the presence of a salivary conditioning film, adhesion forces were reduced strongly, to less than 1 nN, and the differences between the various materials were reduced. Generally, however, initial colonizers of dental hard surfaces presented stronger adhesion forces to the different materials (-4.7 and -0.6 nN in the absence and presence of a salivary conditioning film, respectively) than cariogenic strains (-1.8 and -0.5 nN).

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Oral bacterial adhesion forces to biomaterial surfaces constituting the bracket–adhesive–enamel junction in orthodontic treatment

Busscher

Mei

et al. 2009

European J Oral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding is congruent with that reported by Glantz and Larsson 7 (1971), although the resins tested by these authors belong to another generation of composites, whose chemical compositions differ considerably from those used in our study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Surface energy and wettability of polymers light-cured by two different systems

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThis study evaluated the surface energy and wettability of composite resins polymerized by different light-curing units to ascertain the good wetting of tooth surfaces to achieve adhesion. Material and MethodFiltek Z350 (3M ESPE), Admira (VOCO) and Grandio (VOCO) resins were selected for the testing procedures. The resins were light cured using LED and Halogen devices. Contact angles were measured goniometrically (Ramé-Hart F100) using water and glycerol as test liquids. Surface energy values were calculated with a software program (DROPimage Standard) that uses the harmonic mean method applied to the acid-base theory. The data were analyzed statistically by ANOVA and Tukey's test with a significance of 0.05. Results and ConclusionsNo statistically significant differences were found between the values of surface energy. The measured wettability differed statistically in most combinations as a function of the type of composite resin, type of light-curing unit, and the test liquid.

show abstract

“…Composite resin restorations can have a high surface roughness, even after finishing. A highly polished and smooth surface finish contributes to patient comfort (patients are capable of discerning scratches as small as 20jim), enhances the appearance of restorations, slows the rate of plaque and calculus formation and reduces superficial discolouration (Glantz & Larsson, 1972;Van Noort, 1983;Savoca & Felkner, 1980;Weitman & Eames, 1975).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of time of trimming on the surface finish of anterior composite resins

Heath¹,

Jordan²,

Watts³

1993

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This in vitro study investigates whether the surface smoothness of a finished composite resin is a function of the time at which it is trimmed. Five materials were studied. Visiodispers (VIS) is a sintered microfine, the remainder were hybrid formulations: Miradapt (MIR), Command Ultrafine (COM) and two experimental formulations-'EXP (2)' and 'EXP (15)'-with larger filler particles. All except MIR were photo-activated. Samples were placed and cured in holes machined in Perspex rods, ensuring excess of material and moulded to shape with cellulose acetate matrix strip. The strips were removed immediately after light curing and after 5 min in the case of MIR. Sample groups were finished after the following intervals: 10, 15, 30, 45s, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 min, dry, and after 1 and 7 days in 37 degrees C water. The finishing procedure used plain-cut tungsten-carbide burs and coarse, medium and fine finishing discs, which were applied for standardized times, directions and pressures. Surface roughness was assessed visually and with a surface profilling instrument. COM and VIS materials significantly improved in surface finish when the procedure was delayed for 7 days. However, EXP (2), EXP (15) and MIR surface finishes were independent of finishing time. This may result from a rapid attainment of optimum surface hardness, whereas with COM and VIS incomplete curing leads to smearing of resins and filler across the surface.

show abstract

The Wettability of Composite Resinous Filling Materials

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

Oral bacterial adhesion forces to biomaterial surfaces constituting the bracket–adhesive–enamel junction in orthodontic treatment

Oral bacterial adhesion forces to biomaterial surfaces constituting the bracket–adhesive–enamel junction in orthodontic treatment

Surface energy and wettability of polymers light-cured by two different systems

The effect of time of trimming on the surface finish of anterior composite resins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About