Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry (대한치과보존학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Surface gloss, gloss retention, and color stability of 2 nano-filled universal resin composites

  • Gustavo Fabian Molina (Catedra de Materiales Dentales, Facultad de Odontologia, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba) ;
  • Ricardo Juan Cabral (Catedra de Materiales Dentales, Facultad de Odontologia, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba) ;
  • Ignacio Mazzola (Catedra de Materiales Dentales, Facultad de Odontologia, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba) ;
  • Michael Burrow (Restorative Dental Sciences Division, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong)
  • Received : 2022.06.08
  • Accepted : 2022.09.25
  • Published : 2022.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objectives: This study compared the surface gloss (SG), gloss retention (GR), and color stability (CS) of 2 universal resin composites after chemical (CA) and mechanical (MA) aging. Materials and Methods: Twenty disc-shaped samples of G-ænial A'Chord (GC-Europe) and Filtek Universal (3M-ESPE) were polished with sequential abrasive papers. For CA, specimens were stored in 1 mL of 75% ethanol for 15 days at 37℃, and readings (SG, GR, and CS) were obtained at baseline and 5, 10, and 15 days. For MA, specimens were subjected to 10,750 simulated brushing cycles. SG and CS were evaluated after every 3,583 cycles. SG was measured with a glossmeter (geometrical configuration: 60°), and values were expressed in gloss units. Color was measured with a spectrophotometer using the CIE-L*a*b* color system. The Student's t-test, 1-way analysis of variance, and Scheffé test were used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Results: G-ænial presented significantly higher SG values than Filtek (p = 0.02), with GR reductions of 5.2% (CA) and 5.3% (MA) for G-ænial and 7.6% (CA) and 7.2% (MA) for Filtek. The aging protocol had no statistically significant effect on SG or GR (p = 0.25) from baseline to the final readings. G-ænial-MA presented the lowest color difference (ΔE = 1.8), and G-ænial-CA and Filtek-CA had the largest changes (ΔE = 8.6 and ΔE = 11.8, respectively). Conclusion: G-ænial presented higher SG values and better CS. Both restorative materials demonstrated acceptable GR and CS. Aging protocols impacted these properties negatively.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful to Dr. Ana Carolina Carranza Astrada (Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Catolica de Cordoba, Argentina) for providing the molds to manufacture the samples and to Ing. Luis Crohare (ABO, Facultad de Odontologia, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba, Argentina) for helping with the statistical analysis. The resin composites used in this study were supplied by their manufacturers. This study is a part of a research project funded by a grant from the Secretary of Science and Technology, National University of Cordoba, Argentina (Secyt-UNC Consolidar 2018).

References

  1. Weston JF. Predictable nanohybrid composite systems and techniques for anterior and posterior direct restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent 2013;34:8-12.
  2. Kumari RV, Nagaraj H, Siddaraju K, Poluri RK. Evaluation of the effect of surface polishing, oral beverages and food colorants on color stability and surface roughness of nanocomposite resins. J Int Oral Health 2015;7:63-70. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijos.2015.2
  3. Lainovic T, Blazic L, Kukuruzovic D, Vilotic M, Ivanisevic A, Kakas D. Effect of diamond paste finishing on surface topography and roughness of dental nanohybrid composites - AFM analysis. Procedia Eng 2014;69:945-951.
  4. Aydin N, Topcu FT, Karaoglanoglu S, Oktay EA, Erdemir U. Effect of finishing and polishing systems on the surface roughness and color change of composite resins. J Clin Exp Dent 2021;13:e446-e454.
  5. Fugolin APP, Pfeifer CS. New resins for dental composites. J Dent Res 2017;96:1085-1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034517720658
  6. Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger M, Sakai M, Takahashi H, Tashkandi E, Perez MM. Color difference thresholds in dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent 2015;27(Supplement 1):S1-S9.
  7. Guo G, Shi Q, Luo Y, Fan R, Zhou L, Qian Z, Yu J. Preparation and ageing-resistant properties of polyester composites modified with functional nanoscale additives. Nanoscale Res Lett 2014;9:215.
  8. Nair SR, Niranjan NT, Jayasheel A, Suryakanth DB. Comparative evaluation of colour stability and surface hardness of methacrylate based flowable and packable composite - in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11:ZC51-ZC54.
  9. Rocha RS, Oliveira AC, Caneppele TMF, Bresciani E. Effect of artificial aging protocols on surface gloss of resin composites. Int J Dent 2017;2017:3483171.
  10. Jain V, Platt JA, Moore K, Spohr AM, Borges GA. Color stability, gloss, and surface roughness of indirect composite resins. J Oral Sci 2013;55:9-15. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.55.9
  11. Yadav RD, Raisingani D, Jindal D, Mathur R. A comparative analysis of different finishing and polishing devices on nanofilled, microfilled, and hybrid composite: a scanning electron microscopy and profilometric study. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2016;9:201-208. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1364
  12. AlJazairy YH, Mitwalli HA, AlMoajel NA. The effect of polishing systems on surface roughness of nanohybrid and microhybrid resin composites. Am J Dent 2019;32:47-52. PUBMED
  13. Soliman HAN, Elkholany NR, Hamama HH, El-Sharkawy FM, Mahmoud SH, Comisi JC. Effect of different polishing systems on the surface roughness and gloss of novel nanohybrid resin composites. Eur J Dent 2021;15:259-265. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1718477
  14. Gonulol N, Yilmaz F. The effects of finishing and polishing techniques on surface roughness and color stability of nanocomposites. J Dent 2012;40(Supplement 2):e64-e70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2012.07.005
  15. Zhang L, Yu P, Wang XY. Surface roughness and gloss of polished nanofilled and nanohybrid resin composites. J Dent Sci 2021;16:1198-1203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jds.2021.03.003
  16. Paravina RD, Perez MM, Ghinea R. Acceptability and perceptibility thresholds in dentistry: a comprehensive review of clinical and research applications. J Esthet Restor Dent 2019;31:103-112. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12465
  17. Rocha RS, Fagundes TC, Caneppele T, Bresciani E. Perceptibility and acceptability of surface gloss variations in dentistry. Oper Dent 2020;45:134-142. https://doi.org/10.2341/18-184-C
  18. Schmidt C, Ilie N. The effect of aging on the mechanical properties of nanohybrid composites based on new monomer formulations. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:251-257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0707-3
  19. Drummond JL. Degradation, fatigue, and failure of resin dental composite materials. J Dent Res 2008;87:710-719.
  20. Boaro LC, Goncalves F, Guimaraes TC, Ferracane JL, Pfeifer CS, Braga RR. Sorption, solubility, shrinkage and mechanical properties of "low-shrinkage" commercial resin composites. Dent Mater 2013;29:398-404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2013.01.006
  21. Gul P, Karatas O, Alp HH, Cam IB, Ozakar-Ilday N. Monomer release from nanohybrid composites after bleaching. J Oral Sci 2019;61:351-357. https://doi.org/10.2334/josnusd.18-0063
  22. Thaliyadeth LB, Chakravarthy D, Neelamurthy PS, Selvapandiane V, Jayadevan A, Dimple N. Comparative evaluation of color stability of nanohybrid direct and indirect resin-based composites to Indian spices: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2019;20:1071-1076. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2644
  23. Sideridou ID, Karabela MM, Bikiaris DN. Aging studies of light cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins and a resin composite in water or ethanol/water. Dent Mater 2007;23:1142-1149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.049
  24. Schneider LF, Moraes RR, Cavalcante LM, Sinhoreti MA, Correr-Sobrinho L, Consani S. Cross-link density evaluation through softening tests: effect of ethanol concentration. Dent Mater 2008;24:199-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2007.03.010
  25. Salgado VE, Cavalcante LM, Silikas N, Schneider LF. The influence of nanoscale inorganic content over optical and surface properties of model composites. J Dent 2013;41(Supplement 5):e45-e53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdent.2013.05.011
  26. Giacomelli L, Derchi G, Frustaci A, Orlando B, Covani U, Barone A, De Santis D, Chiappelli F. Surface roughness of commercial composites after different polishing protocols: an analysis with atomic force microscopy. Open Dent J 2010;4:191-194. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874210601004010191
  27. Gurgan S, Koc Vural U, Miletic I. Comparison of mechanical and optical properties of a newly marketed universal composite resin with contemporary universal composite resins: an in vitro study. Microsc Res Tech 2022;85:1171-1179. https://doi.org/10.1002/jemt.23985
  28. Amaya-Pajares SP, Koi K, Watanabe H, da Costa JB, Ferracane JL. Development and maintenance of surface gloss of dental composites after polishing and brushing: review of the literature. J Esthet Restor Dent 2022;34:15-41. https://doi.org/10.1111/jerd.12875