S-PRG-based composites erosive wear resistance and the effect on surrounding enamel

Awareness of possible complications associated with direct composite restorations: A multinational survey among dentists from 13 countries with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Resin-based composites (RBCs) evolved into favoured materials for teeth restorations, marking a significant change in dental practice. Despite many advantages, RBCs exhibit various limitations in their physical and chemical properties. Therefore, we assessed the dentists' awareness of possible complications after direct composite restorations and their opinions about this material.

METHODS

The online questionnaire was created in English in May 2023. A 16-item survey was dedicated to general dentists and specialists. The first section included four questions related to demographic characteristics. The second section comprised twelve questions and focused on awareness of potential side effects of composite restorations, the most crucial advantages and disadvantages of composite resins, and the frequency of experienced clinical complications after the application of composite materials.

RESULTS

A total of 1830 dentists from 13 countries took part in the survey. Dentists most often declared awareness of low adhesion to the dentine (77.5 %) and, most rarely, solubility in oral fluids (42.6 %). Aesthetics was identified as the main advantage of composite fillings (79 %), followed by the possibility of repair (59 %) and adhesion to enamel (57 %). Polymerisation shrinkage was a major disadvantage for most countries (70 % overall). Analysing the declared potential clinical complications for all countries, statistically significant findings were obtained for marginal discolouration (OR=2.982, 95 % CI: 1.321-6.730, p-value=0.009) and borderline significance for secondary caries (OR=1.814, 95 % CI: 0.964-3.415, p-value=0.065).

CONCLUSIONS

Dentists value aesthetics and repairability but are aware of shrinkage and experience discolouration. The issue of toxicity and solubility seems to be the least known to dentists.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Dentists should use RBCs with critical caution due to possible side effects. Despite the undoubted aesthetics of direct composite restorations, it is necessary to remember potential clinical complications such as marginal discolouration or secondary caries.

Are S-PRG composites able to resist against erosive and abrasive challenges and protect surrounding enamel in situ?

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the resistance of S-PRG (Surface Pre-Reacted Glass-ionomer) composites and other restorative materials against erosive and abrasive challenges and their protective effect on enamel adjacent to the restorations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bovine enamel blocks were prepared and randomized into 12 groups, including 6 types of material, each of them subjected to erosion_e or erosion+abrasion_ea: Beautifil II (S-PRG); Beautifil Bulk Restorative (S-PRG); Filtek Z250 XT; Filtek Bulk Fill; EQUIA Forte; Riva Light Cure. Cavities were prepared in the middle of enamel blocks and restored with the materials. Initial profiling measurement was performed on the material and on adjacent enamel (100, 200, 300, 600 and 700 μm from the restoration margin). Palatal intraoral appliances with the restored enamel blocks were used by the volunteers (n = 10). During 5 days appliances were immersed in 2.5 % citric acid for 2 min; 6 × /day (erosion_e). For ea condition, blocks were brushed for 1 min after each acid immersion. Final profile assessment was performed. Data were analysed by two and three way ANOVA followed by Tukey's test (p < 0.05).

RESULTS

Material wear: Riva Light Cure showed the highest wear followed by EQUIA Forte and then all resin composites, including the ones with S-PRG (p = 0.000). Enamel wear: there was significant interaction among type of restorative material, wear condition and distance (p = 0.014), enamel around materials showed similar wear (p = 0.983) and the enamel subjected to ea exhibited highest wear (p = 0.000).

CONCLUSION

SPRG based composites showed resistance against erosive and abrasive challenges but were not able to protect enamel adjacent to the restorations.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

S-PRG composites exhibit resistance to material wear comparable to resin composites. However, they have shown an inability to effectively protect the adjacent enamel under in situ erosive-abrasive conditions, despite the presence of mineral-loss-preventing ions surrounding materials.

Analysis of color stability and degree of conversion of different types of resin composites

Resin composites containing surface pre-reacted glass (S-PRG) have been introduced to reduce demineralization and improve remineralization of the tooth structure. However, water diffusion within the material is necessary for its action, which can impair its overall physicomechanical properties over time, including color stability. This study aimed to evaluate the color stability and related degree of conversion (DC) of four resin composites. Discs (6 x 4 mm, n = 5/group) of microhybrid (MH), nanofilled (NF), nanohybrid (NH), and S-PRG-based nanohybrid (S-PRG-NH) composites with two opacities (A2/A2E and A2O/A2D) were prepared. Color (CIELab and CIEDE2000) was evaluated with a spectrophotometer after aging in grape juice (2 x 10 min/10mL/7days). The DC was analyzed by using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy before and after light-curing. Data were statistically analyzed by using two-way analysis of variance and post-hoc least significant difference tests (p<0.05). In the color stability analysis, the interaction between filler type and opacity was significant (CIELab, p = 0.0015; CIEDE2000, p = 0.0026). NH presented the highest color stability, which did not differ from that of MH. The greatest color alteration was observed for S-PRG-NH. S-PRG fillers also influenced DC (p < 0.05). The nanohybrid resin composite presented favorable overall performance, which is likely related to its more stable organic content. Notwithstanding the benefits of using S-PRG-based nanohybrid resins, mostly in aesthetic procedures, professionals should consider the susceptibility of such resins to color alteration, probably due to the water-based bioactive mechanism of action.