IADR Abstract Archives
Protective Effect of Giomer-Based Resin Composites Against Erosive Enamel Wear
Objectives: The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the protective effect of giomer-based resin composites against erosive wear on the enamel adjacent to the restoration.
Methods: Bovine enamel blocks were randomly distributed in 12 groups (n = 10): giomer-based composite resin composite-Beautiful II® (GI/GII); giomer-based bulk-fill resin composite-Beautiful Bulk Restorative® (GIII/GIV); resin composite-Filtek Z250 XT® (GV/GVI); bulk-fill resin composite-Filtek Bulk Fill Flow® (GVII and GVIII); glass ionomer cement-EQUIA Forte® (GIX/GX); and resin-modified glass ionomer cement - Riva® (GXI/GXII). Being GI, GIII, GV, GVII, GIX and GXI subjected to erosion and the other groups to erosion+abrasion. The blocks were restored according to the manufacturers’ instructions. After the initial profile measurement (using contact profilometry) of the materials and enamel adjacent to them (100, 200, 300, 600 and 700 µm), the blocks were subjected to erosive and abrasive cycling. During 5 days, 6X/day the blocks were immersed in citric acid for 2 min. After washing, the abrasive challenge was performed using a toothbrush machine with artificial saliva/fluoridated dentifrice slurry (3:1) for 60s. Between cycles, the blocks were kept in artificial saliva. The final profile was obtained for material and/or enamel loss measurement. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (p<0.05).
Results: When subjected to erosion the glass ionomer cements (GIX and GXII) showed higher material loss compared to other groups; until 200 µm of distance from the restoration, GIC and giomer-based resin composites were able to promote less enamel wear than resin composite. For erosion+abrasion, giomer-based resin composites showed intermediate material wear compared to GIC (higher wear) and resin composite (less wear); there was no difference of enamel wear adjacent to the studied materials.
Conclusions: Giomer-based composites can be considered alternative restorative materials to be used in erosion-prone patients due to their potential protection against adjacent enamel erosive wear and minimal abrasion.
Methods: Bovine enamel blocks were randomly distributed in 12 groups (n = 10): giomer-based composite resin composite-Beautiful II® (GI/GII); giomer-based bulk-fill resin composite-Beautiful Bulk Restorative® (GIII/GIV); resin composite-Filtek Z250 XT® (GV/GVI); bulk-fill resin composite-Filtek Bulk Fill Flow® (GVII and GVIII); glass ionomer cement-EQUIA Forte® (GIX/GX); and resin-modified glass ionomer cement - Riva® (GXI/GXII). Being GI, GIII, GV, GVII, GIX and GXI subjected to erosion and the other groups to erosion+abrasion. The blocks were restored according to the manufacturers’ instructions. After the initial profile measurement (using contact profilometry) of the materials and enamel adjacent to them (100, 200, 300, 600 and 700 µm), the blocks were subjected to erosive and abrasive cycling. During 5 days, 6X/day the blocks were immersed in citric acid for 2 min. After washing, the abrasive challenge was performed using a toothbrush machine with artificial saliva/fluoridated dentifrice slurry (3:1) for 60s. Between cycles, the blocks were kept in artificial saliva. The final profile was obtained for material and/or enamel loss measurement. Data were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Tukey’s tests (p<0.05).
Results: When subjected to erosion the glass ionomer cements (GIX and GXII) showed higher material loss compared to other groups; until 200 µm of distance from the restoration, GIC and giomer-based resin composites were able to promote less enamel wear than resin composite. For erosion+abrasion, giomer-based resin composites showed intermediate material wear compared to GIC (higher wear) and resin composite (less wear); there was no difference of enamel wear adjacent to the studied materials.
Conclusions: Giomer-based composites can be considered alternative restorative materials to be used in erosion-prone patients due to their potential protection against adjacent enamel erosive wear and minimal abrasion.