Kütlesel Olarak Yerleştirilebilen Restoratif Materyallerin Su Emilimi ve Suda Çözünürlük Özelliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2018, , 13 - 21, 01.04.2018

Hayri Akman

https://doi.org/10.15311/selcukdentj.332982

Öz

Amaç: Kompozit
rezinler ve cam iyonomer simanlar, günümüzde restoratif diş hekimliğinde en sık
kullanılan dental materyaller arasındadır. Su emilimi ve çözünürlük tüm
restoratif materyallerin fiziksel, kimyasal ve mekanik özelliklerini etkileyen,
bütünüyle kontrol altına alınamayan faktörlerdir. Bu çalışmanın amacı, kütlesel
olarak yerleştirilebilen restoratif materyallerin su emilim ve çözünürlük değerlerini
karşılaştırmaktır.

Gereç ve Yöntemler:Çalışmada,
kütlesel yerleştirilen restoratif materyal olarak; SonicFill, x-tra fil, Tetric
N-Ceram Bulk Fill ve Equia Fil,
konvansiyonel kompozit olarak da Filtek Z550 materyali kullanıldı. Her bir materyalden,
10’ar adet olmak üzere (15 mm çapında ve 1 mm kalınlığında) 50 örnek üreticinin
talimatları doğrultusunda LED ışık cihazı (Valo, Ultradent 1200 mW/cm²) ile
polimerize edilerek hazırlandı. Örneklerin suda bekleme sonrası (1, 7, 30 gün) sabit
kütle ağırlıklarındaki değişiklikler, “mikrogram (µg)” olarak ölçüldü, su
emilimi ve çözünürlük değerleri “µg/mm³” olarak hesaplandı.
Kruskal-Wallis ve Mann-Whitney U çoklu karşılaştırma testleri kullanılarak
istatistiksel değerlendirme yapıldı(α=0.05). 

Bulgular:Kütlesel
yerleştirilebilen kompozit rezinler ile geleneksel kompozit rezin materyali
arasında su emilim ve çözünürlük değerleri açısından istatistiksel olarak fark
gözlenmedi (p>0.05). Test edilen materyaller arasında yüksek viskositeli cam
iyonomer simanın su emilim ve çözünürlük değerleri kompozit gruplarına göre
daha yüksek bulundu (p<0.001). Zamana bağlı olarak su emilim değerleri
kompozit gruplarında farklı olmamakla birlikte (p>0.05), cam iyonomer simanın
su emiliminde zamanla artış gözlendi (p<0.001).

Sonuçlar:Kütlesel
yerleştirilebilen kompozitler konvansiyonel kompozit rezinlere benzer su emilim
ve çözünürlük özellikleri sergilemişlerdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:kütlesel
yerleştirilebilen kompozit rezinler,
 yüksek viskoziteli cam iyonomer siman, su
emilimi

Anahtar Kelimeler

kütlesel yerleştirilebilen kompozit rezinler, yüksek viskoziteli cam iyonomer siman

Kaynakça

• 1. Craig RG, editor. Restorative dental materials. 10thed. St. Louis, Missuri: C.V. Mosby Combany, 1997.
• 2. Braden M, Clarke RL. Water absorption characteristics of dental microfine composite filling materials. Biomaterials 1984;5(6):369-72.
• 3. Soderholm K-JM, Zigan M, Ragan M, Fischlschweiger W, Bergman M. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites. J Dent Res 1984;63(10):1248-54.
• 4. Fan PL, Edahl A, Leung RL, Standford JW. Alternative interpretations of water sorption values of composite resins. Journal of Dental Research 1985;64(1):78-80.
• 5. Spahl W, Budzikiewicz H, Geursten W. Extractable residual monomers from various resin materials-a qualitative study. J Dent Res 1994;73(1):295.
• 6. Hansel C, Leyhausen G, Mai UEH, Geurtsen W. Effects of various resin composite (co)monomers and extracts on two cariesassociated micro-organisms in vitro. Dent Mater 1998;77(1):60-7.
• 7. Ferracane JL. Elution of leachable components from composites. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 1994;21(4):441-52.
• 8. Söderholm KJ. Leaking of fillers in dental composites. Journal of Dental Research 1983;62(2):126-30.
• 9. Prati C, Mongiorgi R, Bertocchi G, Baldisserotto G. Dental composite resin porosity and effect on water absorption. Bolletino Societa Italiana Biologia Sperimentale 1991;67(4): 409-14.
• 10. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Influence of ketones on selected mechanical properties of resin composites. Journal of Dental Research 1992;71(11):1847-50.
• 11. Guggenberger R, May R, Stefan KP. New trends in glass-ionomer chemistry. Biomaterials 1998;19(6):479-83.
• 12. Scholtanus JD, Huysmans MC. Clinical failure of class-II restorations of a highly viscous glass-ionomer material over a 6-year period: a retrospective study. J Dent 2007 Feb;35(2):156-62.
• 13. Dowling AH, Fleming GJ. Are encapsulated anterior glass-ionomer restoratives better than their hand-mixed equivalents? J Dent 2009;37(2):133-40.
• 14. Hinoura K, Onose H, Masutani S, Matsuzaki T, Moore BK. Volumetric change of light cured glass ionomer in water. J Dent Res 1993;72:222. Abstr. No.947.
• 15. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Crispin MJ. Dental luting agents: A review of the current literature. J Prosthet Dent 1998;80(3):280-301.
• 16. Yap A, Lee CM. Water sorption and solubility of resin-modified polyalkenoate cements. J Oral Rehabil 1997;24(4):310-4.
• 17. Donadio-Moura J, Gouw-Soares S, de Freitas PM, Navarro RS, Powell LG, Eduardo Cde P. Tensile bond strength of a flowable composite resin to ER:YAG-laser-treated dentin. Lasers Surg Med 2005;36(5):351-5.
• 18. Karaman E, Yazici AR, Ozgunaltay G, Dayangac B. Clinical evaluation of a nanohybrid and a flowable resin composite in non-carious cervical lesions: 24-month results. J Adhes Dent 2012;14(5):485-92.
• 19. Czasch P, Ilie N. In vitro comparison of mechanical properties and degree of cure of bulk fill composites. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17(1):227-35.
• 20. Ilie N, Hickel R, Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR (TM) technology, Dent. Mater 2011; 27(4):348-55.
• 21. Goracci C, Cadenaro M, Fontanive L, Giangrosso G, Juloski J, Vichi A. Polymerization efficiency and flexural strength of low-stress restorative composites, Dent. Mater 2014;30(6):688-94.
• 22. Alshali RZ, Silikas N, Satterthwaite JD. Degree of conversion of bulk-fill compared to conventional resin-composites at two time intervals, Dent. Mater.2013;29(9):213-7.
• 23. Alrahlah A, Silikas N, Watts DC. Post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill dental resin-composites, Dent. Mater 2014; 30(2):149-54.
• 24. Alshali RZ, Salim NA, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N. Post-irradiation hardness development, chemical softening, and thermal stability of bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites, J. Dent 2014;43(2):209-18.
• 25. Leprince JG, Palin WM, Vanacker J, Sabbagh J, Devaux J, Leloup G. Physico-mechanical characteristics of commercially available bulk-fill composites, J. Dent 2014;42(8):993-1000.
• 26. Ref: ISO 4049. Dentistry – Resin based filling materials. International Organization for Standardisation, Switzerland
• 27. Davis N. A nanotechnology composite. Compend Contin. Educ Dent 2003;24(9):662-70.
• 28. Fabre HSC, Fabre S, Cefaly DFG, Carrilho MRO, Garcia FCP, Wang L. Water sorption and solubility of dentin bonding agents light-cured with different light sources. J Dent 2007;35(3):253-8.
• 29. Ito S, Hashimoto M, Wadgaonkar B, Svizero N, Carvalho RM, Yiu C, Rueggeberg FA, Foulger S, Saito T, Nishitani Y, Yoshiyama M, Tay FR, Pashley DH. Effect of resin hydrophilicity on water sorption and changes in modulus of elasticity. Biomater 2005;26(33) :6449-59.
• 30. Lopes LG, Cefaly DGF, Franco EB, Mondelli RFL, Lauris JRP, Navarro MFL. Clinical evaluation of two “packable” posterior composite resins: two-year results. Clin Oral Investig 2003;7(3):123-8.
• 31. Witzel MF, Calheiros FC, Gonçalves F, Kawano Y, Braga RR. Influence of photo activation method on conversion, mechanical properties, degradation in ethanol and contraction stres of resinbased materials. J Dent 2005;33(9):773-9.
• 32. Sidhu SK, Nicholson JW. A Review of Glass-Ionomer Cements for Clinical Dentistry. J Funct Biomater. 2016; 7(3): 16.
• 33. Phillips S, Bishop BM. An in vitro study of the effect of moisture on glass ionomer cement. Quintessence Int 1985;16(2):175-7.
• 34. Naasan MA, Watson TF. Conventional glass ionomers as posterior restorations. A status report for the American Journal of Dentistry. Am J Dent 1998;11(1):36-45.
• 35. Iwami Y, Yamamoto H, Sato W, Kawai K, Torii M, Ebisu S. Weight change of various lightcured restorative materials after water immersion. Oper Dent 1998;23(3):132-7.
• 36. Sevilmiş HH, Bulucu B. Adeziv materyallerin su emilimi özellikleri. [Water Sorption Property of Adhesive Materials.] Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi 2007;31(2):16-21.
• 37. Yoshida K, Tanagawa M, Atsuta M. In-vitro solubility of three types of resin and conventional luting cements. J Oral Rehabil, 1998;25(4):285-91.
• 38. Shen C, Grimaudo N. Effect of hydration on the biaxial flexural strength of a glass ionomer cement. Dent Mater, 1994;10(3):190-95.
• 39. Øysæd H, Ruyter IE. Water sorption and filler characteristics of composites for use in posterior teeth, J. Dent. Res. 1986; 65(11):1315-8.
• 40. Mortier E, Gerdolle DA, Jacquot B, Panighi MM, Importance of water sorption and solubility studies for couple bonding agent–resin-based filling material, Operative Dent 2004;29(6):669-76.
• 41. Ortengen U, Elgh U, Spasenoska V, Milleding P, Haasum J, Karlsson S. Water sorption and flexural properties of a composite resin cement. Int J Prosthodont 2000;13(2):141-7.
• 42. Sideridou ID, Tserki V, Papanastasiou G. Study of water sorption, solubility and modulus of elasticity of light-cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins, Biomaterials 2003;24(4):655-65.
• 43. Curtis AR, Shortall AC, Marquis PM, Palin WM. Water uptake and strength characteristics of a nanofilled resin-based composite. J Dent 2008;36(3):186-93.
• 44. Silva EMD, Almeida GS, Poskus LT, Guimarães JGA. Relationship between the degree of conversion, solubility and salivary sorption of a hybrid and a nanofilled resin composite, J. Appl. Oral Sci. 2008;16 (2):161-6.
• 45. Santos C, Clarke RL, Braden M, Guitian F, Davy KW. Water absorption characteristics of dental composites incorporating hydroxyapatite filler. Biomaterials. 2002 ;23(8):1897-904.
• 46. da Silva MA, Fardin AB, de Vasconcellos RC, Santos Lde M, Tonholo J, da Silva JG Jr, dos Reis JI. Analysis of roughness and surface hardness of a dental composite using atomic force microscopy and microhardness testing. Microsc Microanal 2011;17(3):446-51.
• 47. Braden M, Causton BE, Clarke RL. Diffusion of water in composite filling materials, J Dent Res 1976;55(5):730-732.
• 48. Swartz ML, Moore BK. Direct Restorative Resins-A Comparative Study, J Prosthet Dent 1982;47(2):163-170.
• 49. Momoi Y, McCabe JF. Hygroscopic expansion of resin based composites during 6 months of water storage. Br Dent J 1994; 176(3): 91-6.
• 50. Söderholm KJM, Yang MC, Garcea I, Filler particle leachability of experimental dental composites, Eur. J. Oral Sci 2000; 108 (6): 555-60.
• 51. Van Landuyt K, Nawrot T, Geebelen B, De Munck J, Snauwaert J, Yoshihara K. How much do resin-based dental materials release? A meta-analytical approach, Dent. Mater 2011; 27(8):723-47.
• 52. Goncalves L, Jaime Filho D, Guimarães JG, Poskus LT, Silva EM. Solubility, salivary sorption and degree of conversion of dimethacrylateãbased polymeric matrixes, J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2008;85(2) 320-5.
• 53. Fleming GJ, Awan M, Cooper PR, Sloan AJ. The potential of a resin-composite to be cured to a 4mm depth. Dent Mater. 2008;24(4):522-9.
• 54. Campodonico CE, Tantbirojn D, Olin PS, Versluis A. Cuspal deflection and depth of cure in resin-based composite restorations filled by using bulk, incremental and transtooth-illumination techniques. Journal of Dental Association 2011;142(10):1176-82.
• 55. Alshali RZ, Salim NA, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N. 2015. Long-term sorption and solubility of bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites in water and artificial saliva. J Dent. 2015;43(12):1511-8.
• 56. Kalachandra S, Influence of fillers on the water sorption of composites, Dent. Mater 1989;5(4):283-8.
• 57. van Noort R, Introduction to Dental Materials, 3rd ed., MOSBY Elsevier Ltd., London, 2007.p. 99-127.
• 58. Yap AU, Pek YS, Cheang P. Physico-mechanical properties of a fast-set highly viscous GIC restorative. J Oral Rehabil, 2003; 30(1): 1-8.
• 59. Mc Cabe JF, Walls AWG. Applied dental materials. 9th Ed. Oxford, England: Blackwell Scientific Pub. 2008.p. 178-286.
• 60. Scholtanus JD, Huysmans MC. Clinical failure of class-II restorations of a highly viscous glass-ionomer material over a 6-year period: a retrospective study, J Dent. 2007;35(2):156-62.