IADR Abstract Archives
Hydrolytic and Physical-Mechanical Properties of Bioactive and Bulk Resin Composites
Objectives: New technologies in resin composites, such as the incorporation of bioactive particles (i.e. S-PRG) or compositional changes that optimize their use in larger increments (bulk), bring benefits to clinical routine. However, its mechanism of action can have an impact at the expenses of a compromised performance under other circumstances. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of different technologies and their combinations on the hydrolytic potential and physical-mechanical properties of resin composites (RC).
Methods: The RCs evaluated were: Filtek Z350 - 3M/ ESPE (FZ; control group), Filtek One bulk – 3M/ ESPE (FO; bulk), Beautifil II - Shofu (BII; bioactive) and Beautifil Bulk - Shofu (BB; bulk + bioactive). Specimens of each RC were prepared (10x1mm) and evaluated for water sorption - WS and solubility - WSB (n=10; μg/mm3, in 3 stages: immersion - m1, desiccation - m2 and immersion - m3); wettability - W (n=6; 2μ of deionized water for 2min) and surface microhardness - SM (n=6; 5 Knoop readings per specimen; 10KgF/10s) assessments. The data were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA and Tukey (p<0.05).
Results: RCs showed no statistical difference in terms of WS. Under WSB analysis, all materials revealed negative values, in which FZ and FO were more affected. FO showed lower W compared to the other RCs, which did not differ among them. For SM, the materials FZ, FO and BII presented similar values, while BB had a lower performance.
Conclusions: The use of low shrinkage in bulk fill materials seems to affect the resin composite performance under water interaction properties more than the introduction of bioactive ingredients.
Methods: The RCs evaluated were: Filtek Z350 - 3M/ ESPE (FZ; control group), Filtek One bulk – 3M/ ESPE (FO; bulk), Beautifil II - Shofu (BII; bioactive) and Beautifil Bulk - Shofu (BB; bulk + bioactive). Specimens of each RC were prepared (10x1mm) and evaluated for water sorption - WS and solubility - WSB (n=10; μg/mm3, in 3 stages: immersion - m1, desiccation - m2 and immersion - m3); wettability - W (n=6; 2μ of deionized water for 2min) and surface microhardness - SM (n=6; 5 Knoop readings per specimen; 10KgF/10s) assessments. The data were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA and Tukey (p<0.05).
Results: RCs showed no statistical difference in terms of WS. Under WSB analysis, all materials revealed negative values, in which FZ and FO were more affected. FO showed lower W compared to the other RCs, which did not differ among them. For SM, the materials FZ, FO and BII presented similar values, while BB had a lower performance.
Conclusions: The use of low shrinkage in bulk fill materials seems to affect the resin composite performance under water interaction properties more than the introduction of bioactive ingredients.