COMPARISON OF FLEXURAL STRENGTH AND DEGREE OF CONVERSION OF NOVEL RESIN COMPOSITES USED IN CLINICAL PRACTICE

Year 2024, Volume: 48 Issue: 3, 116 - 124, 20.12.2024

Selinsu Öztürk , Bengü Doğu Kaya , Ayşe Aslı Şenol , Erkut Kahramanoğlu , Pınar Yılmaz Atalı , Bilge Tarçın

Abstract

Background and Aim: The aim of this in vitro study is to compare the flexural strength, modulus of elasticity, degree of conversion, and surface characteristics of recently introduced dental composites with the composites widely used in clinical practice.
Materials and Methods: Pergamon, Parion, and Parion-Flow composites (Dentac) were compared with Ruby (Incidental), Charisma Classic (Kulzer), and Z250 (3M). Flexural strength (FS) and modulus of elasticity (EM) were measured using 10 samples (25x2x2 mm), and three cylindrical samples (8x2 mm) were used for Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) (Jasco Atr Pro-One). A Valo (Ultradent) light-curing device was used for polymerization at 1000 mW/cm2 power intensity. Samples were examined with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Zeiss EVO MA10). The Kruskal–Wallis test, Dunn’s test, Tamhane’s T2 test, and one-way ANOVA analysis were used for statistical analysis (significance level p<0.05).
Results: The highest Fs was obtained with Z250 (142.72 MPa) and the lowest with Parion Flow (77.10 MPa) (p<0.001). The EM values of Z250 (5.3 GPa) were significantly higher than those of Parion Flow (1.64 GPa) (p<0.001). The highest degree of conversion was obtained with Pergamon (86.50) and the lowest with Charisma (50.54) (p<0.001). Surface structure differed depending on the filler and matrix type under SEM examination.
Conclusion: FS, EM, and conversion degrees of Parion, Pergamon, and Ruby composites fell within the clinically acceptable ranges.

Keywords

Flexural Strength , Modulus of Elasticity , Resin Composite , FTIR , SEM

References

• 1. Alzraikat H, Burrow MF, Maghaireh GA, Taha NA. Nanofilled Resin Composite Properties and Clinical Performance: A Review. Oper Dent 2018; 43: 173-190.
• 2. de Moraes RR, Goncalves Lde S, Lancellotti AC, Consani S, Correr- Sobrinho L, Sinhoreti MA. Nanohybrid resin composites: nanofiller loaded materials or traditional microhybrid resins. Oper Dent 2009; 34: 551-557.
• 3. Rodrigues Junior SA, Zanchi CH, Carvalho RV, Demarco FF. Flexural strength and modulus of elasticity of different types of resin-based composites. Braz Oral Res 2007; 21: 16-21.
• 4. Klapdohr S, Moszner N. New inorganic components for dental filling composites. Monatsh Chem 2005; 136: 21-45.
• 5. Ferracane JL. Resin composite—state of the art. Dent Mater 2011; 27: 29–38.
• 6. Mirică IC, Furtos G, Bâldea B, Lucaciu O, Ilea A, Moldovan M et al. Influence of filler loading on the mechanical properties of flowable resin composites. Mater 2020; 13: 1477.
• 7. Cho K, Rajan G, Farrar P, Prentice L, Prusty BG. Dental resin composites: A review on materials to product realizations. Compos Part B Eng 2022; 230: 109495.
• 8. Elfakhri F, Alkahtani R, Li C, Khaliq J. Influence of filler characteristics on the performance of dental composites: A comprehensive review. Ceram Int 2022; 48: 27280-27294.
• 9. Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on mechanical behavior of dental composites. Clin Oral Invest 2009; 13: 427–438.
• 10. Ferracane JL. Resin-based composite performance: are there some things we can’t predict? Dent Mater 2013; 29: 51–58.
• 11. Heintze SD, Ilie N, Hickel R, Reis A, Loguercio A, Rousson V. Laboratory mechanical parameters of composite resins and their relation to fractures and wear in clinical trials-A systematic review. Dent Mater 2017; 33: 101-114.
• 12. Heintze SD, Monreal D, Rousson V. Fatigue resistance of denture teeth. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016; 53: 373–383.
• 13. ISO 2009. Dentistry—polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. Int Stand 2009; 4049: 1-27.
• 14. de Araújo-Neto VG, Sebold M, de Castro EF, Feitosa VP, Giannini M. Evaluation of physico-mechanical properties and filler particles characterization of conventional, bulk-fill, and bioactive resin-based composites. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2021; 115: 104288.
• 15. Alshabib A, Jurado CA, Azpiazu-Flores FX, Aldosary K, Tsujimoto A, Algamaiah H. Mechanical properties and degree of conversion of resin-based core build-up materials and short fiber-reinforced flowable resin-based composite. Dent Mater J 2024; 43: 453-459.
• 16. Yılmaz Atalı P, Doğu Kaya B, Manav Özen A, Tarçın B, Şenol AA, Tüter Bayraktar E et al. Assessment of micro-hardness, degree of conversion, and flexural strength for single-shade universal resin composites. Polymers 2022; 14: 4987.
• 17. Amirouche-Korichi A, Mouzali M, Watts DC. Effects of monomer ratios and highly radiopaque fillers on degree of conversion and shrinkage-strain of dental resin composites. Dent Mater 2009; 25: 1411–1418.
• 18. Tarle Z, Par T. Degree of conversion. In: Miletic V, editor. Dental composite materials for direct restorations. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing 2018; p. 63-85.
• 19. Haenel T, Hausnerová B, Steinhaus J, Price RB, Sullivan B, Moeginger B. Effect of the irradiance distribution from light curing units on the local micro-hardness of the surface of dental resins. Dent Mater 2015; 31: 93-104.
• 20. Lopes-Rocha L, Ribeiro-Gonçalves L, Henriques B, Özcan M, Tiritan ME, Souza JCM. An integrative review on the toxicity of Bisphenol A (BPA) released from resin composites used in dentistry. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2021; 109: 1942- 1952.
• 21. Imazato S, Tarumi H, Kobayashi K, Hiraguri H, Oda K, Tsuchitani Y. Relationship between the degree of conversion and internal discoloration of light-activated composite. Dent Mater J 1995; 14: 23-30.
• 22. Krifka S, Seidenader C, Hiller KA, Schmalz G, Schweikl H. Oxidative stress and cytotoxicity generated by dental composites in human pulp cells. Clin Oral Investig 2012; 16: 215–224.
• 23. Tarle Z, Knezevic A, Demoli N, Meniga A, Sutaloa J, Unterbrink G et al. Comparison of composite curing parameters: effects of light source and curing mode on conversion, temperature rise and polymerization shrinkage. Oper Dent 2006; 31: 219–226.
• 24. Leprince JG, Palin WM, Hadis MA, Devaux J, Leloup G. Progress in dimethacrylate-based dental composite technology and curing efficiency. Dent Mater 2013; 29: 139–156.
• 25. Obici AC, Sinhoreti MAC, Frollini E, Correr Sobrinho L, Consani S. Degree of conversion of Z250 composite determined by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy: comparison of techniques, storage periods and photo-activation methods. Mater Res 2004; 7: 605-610.
• 26. Jager S, Balthazard R, Dahoun A, Mortier E. Filler content, surface microhardness, and rheological properties of various flowable resin composites. Oper. Dent 2016; 6: 655–665.
• 27. Borges LAS, Borges AB, Barcelos DC, Saavedra GSFA, Paes Júnior TJA, Rode SM. Avaliação da resistência flexural e módulo de elasticidade de diferentes resinas compostas indiretas. Rev Pós- Grad 2012; 19: 50-56.
• 28. Aminoroaya A, Neisiany RE, Khorasani SN, Panahi P, Das O, Madry H et al. A review of dental composites: challenges, chemistry aspects, filler influences, and future insights. Compos Part B Eng 2021; 216: 108852.
• 29. Grazioli G, Cuevas-Suárez CE, Nakanishi L, Francia A, de Moraes RR. Physicochemical characterization of two bulk fill composites at different depths. Restor Dent Endod 2021; 46: 39.
• 30. Graf N, Ilie N. Long-term mechanical stability and light transmission characteristics of one shade resin-based composites. J Dent 2022; 116: 103915.
• 31. Boussès Y, Brulat-Bouchard N, Bouchard PO, Abouelleil H, Tillier Y. Theoretical prediction of dental composites yield stress and flexural modulus based on filler volume ratio. Dent Mater 2020; 36: 97-107.
• 32. Fidalgo-Pereira R, Carpio ME, Carvalho Ó, Catarino S, Torres O, Souza JCM. Relationship between the inorganic content and the polymerization of the organic matrix of resin composites for dentistry: a narrative review. RevSALUS 2022; 4:136.
• 33. Jun SK, Kim DA, Goo HJ, Lee HH. Investigation of the correlation between the different mechanical properties of resin composites. Dent Mater J 2013; 32: 48-57.