Comparative Evaluation of Surface Hardness and Color Stability of Dental Composites with Different Photoinitiators

Abstract

Aim This study aims to comparatively investigate the color stability and microhardness values of dental composites with different photoinitiators. Material and method In the study, Ivoclar Tetric N-Ceram, Dentac Parion, and FGM Llis composites were used. A total of 30 composite discs were evenly divided for surface microhardness and ΔE measurements. Each subgroup contained 5 composite discs (Diameter: 5 mm, Thickness: 2 mm). Before the experimental procedures, all composite discs were aged in a coffee solution for one week. Surface microhardness was measured using the Vickers Hardness Test device, while color stability was assessed with a spectrophotometer. One-way ANOVA and Two-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA with Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons were applied. Results No statistically significant difference was observed among the three dental composite groups in terms of color stability (p > 0.05). However, their color stability performance ranked from highest to lowest as follows: Llis (3.13 ± 0.42) > Parion (2.76 ± 0.57) > Tetric N-Ceram (2.70 ± 0.76). In contrast, a statistically significant difference was detected among the groups regarding surface microhardness (p < 0.05). Llis exhibited significantly higher values compared to Tetric N-Ceram and Parion (p < 0.05). Conclusion The compositional structure of the composite material and the photoinitiator mechanism used are directly related to the formation of its mechanical properties.

Keywords

• Camphorquinone
• Color stability
• Dental composite
• Microhardness
• Photoinitiator

References

1. Chaudhary S, Sachdeva S. Current advances in dental composites - a review article. Int J Adv Res (Indore). 2022;10(6):901–6.
2. Ritter AV. Sturdevant’s art & science of operative dentistry-e-book. 6th ed. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2017. p. 437.
3. Bal H, Yazicioglu O, Erdilek D. Fotoinitatörlerin absorbsiyon spektrumları ve karşılaştırılmalarının grafiksel incelenmesi. J Int Dent Sci. 2023;9(2):84–91.
4. Alvim HH, Alecio AC, Vasconcellos WA, Furlan M, de Oliveira JE, Saad JRC. Analysis of camphorquinone in composite resins as a function of shade. Dent Mater. 2007;23(10):1245–9.
5. Kowalska A, Sokolowski J, Bociong K. The photoinitiators used in resin based dental composite—a review and future perspectives. Polymers (Basel). 2021;13(3):470.
6. Maciel DSA, Caires-Filho AB, Fernandez-Garcia M, Anauate-Netto C, Alonso RCB. Effect of camphorquinone concentration in physical‐mechanical properties of experimental flowable resin composites. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:7921247.
7. Temel G, Enginol B, Aydin M, Balta DK, Arsu N. Photopolymerization and photophysical properties of amine linked benzophenone photoinitiator for free radical polymerization. J Photochem Photobiol A Chem. 2011;219(1):26–31.
8. Wei Y, Wang D, Liu X. Design, synthesis and properties of oral composite resin monomers with different photoinitiators. Chin J Tissue Eng Res. 2024;28(5):731.

9. Burtscher P. Ivocerin in comparison to camphorquinone. Ivoclar Vivadent Rep. 2013;19(1):11–5.
10. Santini A, Miletic V, Swift MD, Bradley M. Degree of conversion and microhardness of TPO-containing resin-based composites cured by polywave and monowave LED units. J Dent. 2012;40(7):577–84.
11. AlSheikh R. Color stability of Lucirin-photo-activated resin composite after immersion in different staining solutions: a spectrophotometric study. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2019;11:297–311.
12. Üçüncü MY, Üçüncü MK. Comparison of the mechanical properties of various microhybrid dental composites. Eurasian Dent Res. 2023;1(3):58–64.
13. Kayalidere EE, Dorter C. Effects of in-office bleaching agents on polished and unpolished nanofilled resin composite. J Am Dent Assoc. 2023;154(7):592–600.
14. Paravina RD, Pérez MM, Ghinea R. Acceptability and perceptibility thresholds in dentistry: a comprehensive review of clinical and research applications. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2019;31(2):103–12.
15. Tejada‐Casado M, Pérez MM, Della Bona A, Lübbe H, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ. Chroma‐dependence of CIEDE2000 acceptability thresholds for dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2024;36(3):469–76.
16. Pruthi G, Jain V, Kandpal HC, Mathur VP, Shah N. Effect of bleaching on color change and surface topography of composite restorations. Int J Dent. 2010;2010:695748.
17. Cruz da Silva ET, Charamba Leal CF, Miranda SB, Evangelista Santos M, Saeger Meireles S, Maciel de Andrade AK, et al. Evaluation of single‐shade composite resin color matching on extracted human teeth. Sci World J. 2023;2023:4376545.
18. AlHabdan A, AlShamrani A, AlHumaidan R, AlFehaid A, Eisa S. Color matching of universal shade resin‐based composite with natural teeth and its stability before and after in‐office bleaching. Int J Biomater. 2022;2022:8420890.
19. Paravina RD, Ghinea R, Herrera LJ, Bona AD, Igiel C, Linninger M, et al. Color difference thresholds in dentistry. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2015;27(Suppl 1):S1–9.
20. Ruyter IE, Nilner K, Möller B. Color stability of dental composite resin materials for crown and bridge veneers. Dent Mater. 1987;3(5):246–51.
21. Alghazali N, Burnside G, Moallem M, Smith P, Preston A, Jarad FD. Assessment of perceptibility and acceptability of color difference of denture teeth. J Dent. 2012;40:e10–7.
22. Johnston WM, Kao E. Assessment of appearance match by visual observation and clinical colorimetry. J Dent Res. 1989;68(5):819–22.
23. Filija E, Šalinović I. Microhardness testing: can we measure the repair of demineralized lesion? Sonda. 2022;43(1):44–7.
24. Binhasan M, Solimanie AH, Almuammar KS, Alnajres AR, Alhamdan MM, Al Ahdal K, et al. The effect of dentifrice on micro-hardness, surface gloss, and micro-roughness of nano filled conventional and bulk-fill polymer composite—A micro indentation and profilometric study. Materials. 2022;15(12):4347.
25. Fares H. Evaluation of fracture toughness and micro hardness of three current resin composite restorative materials. Egypt Dent J. 2023;69(2):1623–9.
26. Padilla-Cáceres TC, Arbildo-Vega H, Mamani-Cori V, Caballero-Apaza L, Casa-Coila MD. In vitro evaluation of the effect of two pediatric syrups on the microhardness and surface roughness of restoration materials. J Clin Exp Dent. 2024;16(9):e1098.
27. ISO. ISO 4049:2019. Dentistry—Polymer-based restorative materials. London: British Standards Institution; 2019.
28. Birant S, İlisulu SC, Üçüncü MK. Evaluation of glass ionomer restorative materials’ surface roughness and microhardness in vitro after acidic challenge. Essent Dent. 2023;2(3):87–94.
29. Rao NZ, Fuller M. Acidity and antioxidant activity of cold brew coffee. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):16030.
30. Fidalgo-Pereira R, Carvalho Ó, Catarino SO, Henriques B, Torres O, Braem A, et al. Effect of inorganic fillers on the light transmission through traditional or flowable resin-matrix composites for restorative dentistry. Clin Oral Investig. 2023;27(9):5679–93.
31. 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 (Basel). 2022;14(22):4987.
32. Deng H, Liu F, He J. The effect of inorganic filler content on the properties of BPA-free bulk-fill dental resin composites. Materials. 2024;17(20):5040.
33. Albuquerque PPAC, Moreira ADL, Moraes RR, Cavalcante LM, Schneider LFJ. Color stability, conversion, water sorption and solubility of dental composites formulated with different photoinitiator systems. J Dent. 2013;41:e67–72.