CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2020; 9(03): 141-146
DOI: 10.4103/ejgd.ejgd_134_19
Original Article

Evaluation of Surface Characteristics and Weight Variation of Different Composite Resins after Simulated Toothbrushing

Jéssika Raíssa Medeiros De Almeida
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
,
Aion Mangino Messias
1   Department of Dentistry, São Paulo State University, São Paulo, Brazil
,
Diana Ferreira Gadelha
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
,
Sergei Godeiro Fernandes Rabelo Caldas
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
,
Marília Regalado Galvão Rabelo Caldas
Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, Brazil
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the surface characteristics of restorations performed after simulated toothbrushing and to compare the results between the composites. Materials and Methods: In total, 80 samples were made (7 mm × 4 mm) from the composites: Bulk Fill One, Bulk Fill Flow, Z350 XT, and Z350 XT flow (3M/ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA). Half of the specimens was submitted to 60,000 cycles of simulated toothbrushing, while the other half was the control group (n = 10). The surface was evaluated through Scanning electronic microscopy (SEM), surface roughness (Ra), and weight loss, before and after the simulated toothbrushing. To evaluate the statistical analysis, a two-factors variance test and the Tukey's posttest were performed. Results: In the analysis performed by SEM, it was observed the presence of both small and medium protruding particles in all groups after simulated toothbrushing, with the exception of the group which used Z350 flow composite. All materials presented increasing on Ra after simulated toothbrushing. Regarding weight variation, there was not any significant statistical difference in all materials. Conclusions: The abrasive process occasioned by toothbrushing leads to changes on the particles' disposition, which causes changes on the surface and increase on the Ra. On the other hand, there was not any difference regarding to weight variation.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.




Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2020. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 
  • References

  • 1 Al Qathani K, Al Bounni RS, Al Omari M, Assery M. Wear and surface roughness of three different composite resins after simulated toothbrushing: An in vitro study. Int J Oral Care Res 2017;5:137-42.
  • 2 Takanashi E, Kishikawa R, Ikeda M, Inai N, Otsuki M, Foxton RM, et al. Influence of abrasive particle size on surface properties of flowable composites. Dent Mater J 2008;27:780-6.
  • 3 Monteiro B, Spohr AM. Surface roughness of composite resins after simulated toothbrushing with different dentifrices. J Int Oral Health 2015;7:1-5.
  • 4 Rigo LC, Bordin D, Fardin VP, Coelho PG, Bromage TG, Reis A, et al. Influence of polishing system on the surface roughness of flowable and regular-viscosity bulk fill composites. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 2018;38:e79-86.
  • 5 Murchison DF, Charlton DG, Moore WS. Comparative radiopacity of flowable resin composites. Quintessence Int 1999;30:179-84.
  • 6 Lai G, Zhao L, Wang J, Kunzelmann KH. Surface properties and color stability of dental flowable composites influenced by simulated toothbrushing. Dent Mater J 2018;37:717-24.
  • 7 Tsujimoto A, Barkmeier WW, Takamizawa T, Latta MA, Miyazaki M. Depth of cure, flexural properties and volumetric shrinkage of low and high viscosity bulk-fill giomers and resin composites. Dent Mater J 2017;36:205-13.
  • 8 Al Azmi MM, Hashem MI, Assery MK, Al Sayed MS. An in vitro evaluation of mechanical properties and surface roughness of bulk fill vs. incremental fill resin composites. Int J Prev Clin Dent Res 2017;4:37-42.
  • 9 Abueleinaina DA, Neel EA, Al-Dharrab A. Surface characterization and mechanical behavior of bulk fill versus incremental dental composites. Tanta Dent J 2017;10:56-61.
  • 10 3M ESPE. Educational Flyer – Contraction. Available from: http://multimedia. 3m.com/mws/media/1507816O/filtek-one-stress-education- flyer.pdf. [Last accessed on 2018 Aug 20].
  • 11 Moraes RR, Ribeiro Ddos S, Klumb MM, Brandt WC, Correr-Sobrinho L, Bueno M.In vitro toothbrushing abrasion of dental resin composites: Packable, microhybrid, nanohybrid and microfilled materials. Braz Oral Res 2008;22:112-8.
  • 12 Barakah HM, Taher NM. Effect of polishing systems on stain susceptibility and surface roughness of nanocomposite resin material. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:625-31.
  • 13 Alawjali SS, Lui JL. Effect of one-step polishing system on the color stability of nanocomposites. J Dent 2013;41 Suppl 3:e53-61.
  • 14 Garcia FC, Wang L, D’Alpino PH, Souza JB, Araújo PA, Mondelli RF. Evaluation of the roughness and mass loss of the flowable composites after simulated toothbrushing abrasion. Braz Oral Res 2004;18:156-61.
  • 15 O’Neill C, Kreplak L, Rueggeberg FA, Labrie D, Shimokawa CA, Price RB. Effect of tooth brushing on gloss retention and surface roughness of five bulk-fill resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30:59-69.
  • 16 Oliveira GU, Mondelli RF, Charantola Rodrigues M, Franco EB, Ishikiriama SK, Wang L. Impact of filler size and distribution on roughness and wear of composite resin after simulated toothbrushing. J Appl Oral Sci 2012;20:510-6.
  • 17 Almeida J, Medeiros TC, Araujo DFG, Caldas SGFR, Galvão MR. Evaluation of roughness, hardness, and surface of ionomer glass cements after submission to different systems of finishing and polishing. Rev Odontol UNESP 2017;46:330-5.
  • 18 Sousa L, Amorim D, Messias A, Caldas S, Galvão M. Comparative study in vitro wear resistance between powder/liquid glass ionomer cement and encapsulated. Rev Odontol UNESP 2017;46:51-5.
  • 19 Leitão J, Hegdahl T. On the measuring of roughness. Acta Odontol Scand 1981;39:379-84.
  • 20 Gonçalves F, Pfeifer CS, Ferracane JL, Braga RR. Contraction stress determinants in dimethacrylate composites. J Dent Res 2008;87:367-71.
  • 21 Suzuki T, Kyoizumi H, Finger WJ, Kanehira M, Endo T, Utterodt A, et al. Resistance of nanofill and nanohybrid resin composites to toothbrush abrasion with calcium carbonate slurry. Dent Mater J 2009;28:708-16.
  • 22 Quirynen M, Bollen CM. The influence of surface roughness and surface-free energy on supra- and subgingival plaque formation in man. A review of the literature. J Clin Periodontol 1995;22:1-4.
  • 23 Lima RB, Troconis CC, Moreno MB, Murillo-Gómez F, De Goes MF. Depth of cure of bulk fill resin composites: A systematic review. J Esthet Restor Dent 2018;30:492-501.
  • 24 Kanter J, Koski RE, Martin D. The relationship of weight loss to surface roughness of composite resins from simulated toothbrushing. J Prosthet Dent 1982;47:505-13.