Oxygen Inhibition of Surface Composites and Its Correlation with Degree of Conversion and Color Stability

Three-Dimensional Printed Resin: Impact of Different Cleaning Protocols on Degree of Conversion and Tensile Bond Strength to a Composite Resin Using Various Adhesive Systems

The present investigation tested the effect of cleaning methods and adhesives on the tensile bond strength (TBS) of a resin-based composite luted to a temporary 3D printed resin. Substrates (n= 360) were printed using a Rapidshape D20II and cleaned with a butyldiglycol-based solution, isopropanol, or by centrifugation. Specimens were air-abraded with Al₂O₃ (mean particle size 50 µm) at 0.1 MPa followed by pretreatment (n = 30/subgroup) with: (1) Clearfil Ceramic Primer (CCP); (2) Clearfil Universal Bond (CUB); (3) Scotchbond Universal Plus (SUP) or 4. Visio.link (VL) and luted to PanaviaV5. TBS (n = 15/subgroup) was measured initially (24 h at 37 °C water) or after thermal cycling (10,000×, 5/55 °C). The degree of conversion (DC) for each cleaning method was determined prior and after air-abrasion. Univariate ANOVA followed by post-hoc Scheffé test was computed (p < 0.05). Using Ciba-Geigy tables and chi-square, failure types were analyzed. The DC values were >85% after all cleaning methods, with centrifugation showing the lowest. CCP pretreatment exhibited the lowest TBS values, with predominantly adhesive failures. The combination of CCP and centrifugation increased the TBS values (p < 0.001) compared to the chemical cleaning. CUB, SUP, and VL, regardless of cleaning, can increase the bond strength between the 3D printed resin and the conventional luting resin.

In Vitro Optical and Physical Stability of Resin Composite Materials with Different Filler Characteristics

The objective of this study was to compare the physical and optical stability of resin composite materials with different filler characteristics. Ninety-six resin composite blocks (6 mm × 6 mm × 2 mm) were prepared using four different types of resin composite, divided into four groups. Specimens from the same material were randomly divided into four groups (n = 6) and allocated for Vickers hardness (VH), water sorption, solubility (WS/SL), and staining and aging challenges tests. One-way ANOVA showed significant differences in microhardness (p = 0.0001), WS (p = 0.0001), and SL (p = 0.003) among the tested groups. Beautifil II LS recorded the highest hardness, and CharmFil^®Flow had the lowest value. Beautifil Injectable X and II LS showed negative WS, whereas the other groups had positive values. All groups showed positive SL. Repeated measures ANOVA showed significant color parameter alteration in the tested groups (p = 0.0001). All groups showed significant color shifting after one week of the staining challenge. Repeated measures ANOVA showed a significant color parameter (p = 0.0001) and weight (p = 0.001) alteration after the aging challenge. The optical and physical stability of resin composites may vary according to filler characteristics. Clinicians should choose the composite as per the desired outcome.

Influence of Air-Barrier and Curing Light Distance on Conversion and Micro-Hardness of Dental Polymeric Materials

This study aims to assess the conversion degree and hardness behavior of two new commercial dental restorative composites that have been submitted to light curing in different environments (air and glycerin, respectively) at various distances from the light source (1 to 5 mm) and to better understand the influence of the preparation conditions of the restorative materials. Through FT-IR spectrometry, the crosslinking degree of the commercial restorative materials have been investigated and different conversion values were obtained (from ~17% to ~90%) but more importantly, it was shown that the polymerization environment exhibits a significant influence on the crosslinking degree of the resin-based composites especially for obtaining degrees of higher polymerization. Additionally, the mechanical properties of the restorative materials were studied using the nanoindentation technique showing that the nano-hardness behavior is strongly influenced not only by the polymerization lamp position, but also by the chemical structure of the materials and polymerization conditions. Thus, the nanoindentation results showed that the highest nano-hardness values (~0.86 GPa) were obtained in the case of the flowable C3 composite that contains BisEMA and UDMA as a polymerizable organic matrix when crosslinked at 1 mm distance from the curing lamp using glycerin as an oxygen-inhibitor layer.

The Microhardness and Surface Roughness Assessment of Bulk-Fill Resin Composites Treated with and without the Application of an Oxygen-Inhibited Layer and a Polishing System: An In Vitro Study

The aim of this study was to assess the microhardness and surface roughness of bulk-fill resin composites treated with and without the application of an oxygen-inhibited layer (OIL) and a polishing system. This in vitro experimental study consisted of 72 resin composite blocks divided into three groups: Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill, Opus Bulk Fill APS, and Filtek Bulk Fill. Each resin composite group was further divided into two subgroups: with and without OIL control. Subsequently, surface roughness and microhardness were measured before and after polishing. A t-test was used to compare independent and related measures. For the intergroup comparison of variation before and after polishing, the Kruskal−Wallis test with Bonferroni post hoc was used considering a significance level of p < 0.05. When comparing surface roughness, significant differences were observed between Opus Bulk Fill resin composite with and without OIL control (p = 0.003) before polishing. The same occurred when comparing Tetric N-Ceram resin composite with and without OIL control (p = 0.039) after polishing. In addition, the surface roughness of Filtek Bulk Fill, Opus Bulk Fill, and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill resin composites, with and without OIL control, decreased significantly after polishing (p < 0.001), while surface microhardness significantly increased (p < 0.05), with the exception of Opus Bulk Fill resin with OIL control (p = 0.413). In conclusion, OIL control and polishing significantly improved the surface roughness and surface microhardness of Filtek Bulk Fill and Tetric N-Ceram Bulk Fill resin composites. However, in the case of Opus Bulk Fill resin composite, only its surface roughness was significantly improved.

Surface roughness and oxygen inhibited layer control in bulk-fill and conventional nanohybrid resin composites with and without polishing: in vitro study

Background

It has been demonstrated that dental restorations with rough surfaces can have several disadvantages such as pigment retention or plaque accumulation, which can facilitate caries formation, color variation, loss of brightness, degradation of restoration, among others. The present study aimed to assess surface roughness in bulk fill and conventional nanohybrid resins with and without polishing, controlling the oxygen inhibited layer.

Methods

This in vitro and longitudinal experimental study consisted of 120 resin blocks of 6 mm diameter and 4 mm depth, divided into two groups: Bulk Fill (Tetric^® N-Ceram Bulk-fill, Opus Bulk Fill APS, Filtek™ Bulk Fill) and conventional nanohybrid (Tetric^® N-Ceram, Opallis EA2, Filtek™ Z250 XT). Each resin group was divided into two equal parts, placing glycerin only on one of them, in order to control the oxygen inhibited layer. Subsequently, the surface roughness was measured before and after the polishing procedure with Sof-Lex discs. The data were analyzed with the T-test for related measures, and for comparison between groups before and after polishing, the non-parametric Kruskal Wallis test with the Bonferroni post hoc was used, considering a significance level of p < 0.05.

Results

Before polishing, the resin composites with the lowest surface roughness were Opus Bulk Fill APS (0.383 ± 0.186 µm) and Opallis EA2 (0.430 ± 0. 177 µm) with and without oxygen inhibited layer control, respectively; while after polishing, those with the lowest surface roughness were Opus Bulk Fill APS (0.213 ± 0.214 µm) and Tetric N-Ceram (0.097 ± 0.099 µm), with and without oxygen inhibited layer control, respectively. Furthermore, before and after polishing, all resins significantly decreased their surface roughness (p < 0.05) except Opus Bulk Fill APS resin with oxygen inhibited layer control (p = 0.125). However, when comparing this decrease among all groups, no significant differences were observed (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The Opus Bulk Fill APS resin with oxygen inhibited layer control presented lower surface roughness both before and after polishing, being these values similar at both times. However, after polishing the other bulk fill and conventional nanohybrid resins with and without oxygen inhibited layer control, the surface roughness decreased significantly in all groups, being this decrease similar in all of them.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12903-022-02297-w.