Evaluation of Polymerization Shrinkage and Depth of Cure of Silorane Based Composite Resin and Methacrylate Based Composite Resin (Comparative Study)
comparative study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15218/edj.2018.10Keywords:
Silorane, Methacrylate, Polymerization shrinkage, Depth of cure, Composite resin.Abstract
Background and objectives: composite constitutes the majority of the direct tooth colored restorations that replace the biological tissue. The major drawbacks of composite resins are related to polymerization shrinkage. This study aimed to compare the polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure between different types of composite resins.
Materials and methods: fifteen premolar teeth for each group were collected and cavities prepared on the buccal surface to the depth of 1.5 mm with 3 mm using a diamond cylindrical bur with water coolant. Then each fifteen cavities were filled with one type of composite resin according to the manufacturing instructions. After that specimens were stored in deionized water for one week. Subsequently, the marginal gaps were observed and measured by using a light microscope with a reticular measuring ocular. For the depth of cure Fifteen samples for each group were prepared using metal molds with 6 mm thickness and 4 mm in diameter The composite materials were light cured, then the specimen removed from the mold and the uncured material gently removed with the plastic spatula, the height of cured material was measured with a micrometer and the values were divided by 2, this value was recorded as a depth of cure.
Results: The descriptive statistics for the degree of polymerization shrinkage among three groups cleared that the P90 showed the lowest value for polymerization shrinkage with significant difference among three groups. For the depth of cure, it was clear that the Sigma methacrylate based composite resin showed the highest value with significant difference among three groups.
Conclusion: Silorane based composite resin produced less polymerization shrinkage in comparison with methacrylate composites resin. The Depth of cure of Sigma methacrylate based composite resin is more in comparison silorane based composite resin.
References
1. Ciccone-Nogueira JC, Borsatto MC, de Souza-Zaroni WC, Ramos RP, Palma-Dibb RG. Microhardness of composite resins at different depths varying the post-irradiation time. J Appl Oral Sci 2007; 15:305-9.
2. Ferracane JL. Placing dental composites—a stressful experience. Oper Dent 2008; 33:247-25.
3. Braga RR, Ballester RY, Ferracane JL. Factors involved in the development of polymerization shrinkage stress in resin-composites: a systematic review. Dent Mater 2005; 21:962-70.
4. Palin WM, Fleming GJP, Burke FJT, Marquis PM, Randall RC. The influence of short and medium-term water immersion on the hydrolytic stability of novel low-shrink dental composites. Dent Mater 2005; 21:852-63.
5. Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater 2005; 21:68-74.
6. 3M ESPE. Filtek P90 Low a shrinkage posterior restorative system. United States. 3M ESPE; 2007.
7. Tokuyama Dental Italy. Estellite Quick. Technical Report. Italy.
8. 3M ESPE. Filtek Z350 XT. United States.3M ESPE; 2007.
9. Cramer NB, Stansbury JW, Bowman CN. Recent advances and developments in composite dental restorative materials. J Dent Res 2011; 90:402-16.
10. Amaral CM, Bedran de Castro AKB, Pimenta LAF, Ambrosano GMB. Influence of resin composite polymerization techniques on microleakage and microhardness. Quintessence Int 2002; 33:685-89.
11. Agrawal S V, Parakh V V, Shah C N. Comparative Evaluation of microleakage of silorane-based composite and nanohybrid composite with or without polyethylene fiber inserts in Class II restorations: An In Vitro Study. Oper Dent 2012; 37:E1-7.
12. Sakaguchi RL, Wiltbank BD and Shah NC. Critical configuration analysis of four methods for measuring polymerization shrinkage strain of composites. Dent Mater 2004 ; 20: 388-96.
13. Weinmann W, Thalacker C, Guggenberger R. Siloranes in dental composites. Dent. Mater. 2005; 21:68-74.
14. Antonucci JM, Giuseppetti AA, O Donnell JNR, Schumacher GE, Skrtic D. Polymerization stress development in dental composites: Effect of cavity design factor. Mater 2009; 2:169-80.
15. Joseph A, Santosh L, Hegde J, Panchajanya S, George R. Microleakage evaluation of silorane based composite and methacrylate based composite in class II box preparations using two different layering techniques: An in vitro study. Ind J Dent Res 2013; 24:148.
16. DeWald JP and Ferracane JL. A comparison of four modes of evaluating depth of cure of light-activated composites. J Dent Res 1987; 66:727-30.
17. Leprince JG, Leveque P, Nysten B,Gallez B, Devaux J, Leloup G. New insight into the “depth of cure” of dimethacrylate based dental composites. Dent Mater 2012; 28:512-20.
18. Kusgos A, Ulker M, Yesilyurt A, Yoldas OH, Ozil M, Tanriver M. Silorane-based composite: depth of cure, surface hardness, degree of Conversion, and cervical microleakage in Class II cavities. J Esthet Restor Dent 2011; 23: 324-35.
19. Marghalani HY. Post-irradiation Vickers hardness development of novel resin composites. Mat Res 2010; 13: 81-7.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright on any article published in Erbil Dental Journal is retained by the author(s) in agreement with the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial ShareAlike License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).
