World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 3 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Morphological Features of Composite Resin Surfaces after Two- and Three-Body Wear Simulation

Masafumi Kanehira, Werner J Finger, Naohiko Iwasaki, Natthavoot Koottathape, Hidekazu Takahashi

Citation Information : Kanehira M, Finger WJ, Iwasaki N, Koottathape N, Takahashi H. Morphological Features of Composite Resin Surfaces after Two- and Three-Body Wear Simulation. World J Dent 2012; 3 (3):221-228.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1160

Published Online: 01-12-2013

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; The Author(s).


Abstract

Purpose

To investigate morphological surface features of different composite resins after 30,000 sliding wear cycles under two- and three-body wear action.

Materials and methods

The morphology of worn surfaces of four nanofiller containing composite resins, Filtek Supreme XT (FIL), MI Flow (MFL), Venus Diamond (VED) and Venus Pearl (VEP) were investigated and compared with three conventional composites as references, microfilled Durafill VS (DUR), microhybrid Filtek Z250 (Z250) and hybrid-type Clearfil AP-X (APX). Plane surfaces of the polymerized and water-saturated materials (n = 5) were tested in a custom-built pin-on-disk wear machine fitted with a zirconia ball, 4 mm in diameter, serving as the antagonist ‘cusp’ and loading the specimen at 15° angulation for 3.7 mm long sliding paths (50 N load, 1.2 Hz, 30,000 cycles) either in water, simulating two-body wear, or in slurries of PMMA beads or poppy seed, simulating three-body wear. Random samples of each material were selected and sputter-coated with gold for inspection of the wear patterns using scanning electron microscopy.

Results

Under two-body wear action all materials showed cracking as indicator of fatigue. MFL and VEP with prepolymer particles were least affected. Similarly, surfaces after three-body wearing with PMMA bead slurry revealed crack formation for five of the composites tested. The micro-hybrid Z250 and the nanofilled FIL displayed compressed and shallow delaminated areas. With poppy seed slurry as the third-body medium DUR was deeply destructed. Also the nanohybrid VED with a small fraction of up to 20 ƒÝm large ground glass fillers revealed deep cracks, whereas small delamination areas characterized the hybrid composite APX. Z250 as well as FIL, MFL and VEP were smoothly abraded without showing signs of cracking or delamination.

Conclusion

Composite resin surfaces, worn under two-body sliding showed mainly crack formation as an expression of fatigue. Similarly, three-body abrasion with a PMMA bead slurry revealed surface cracks to various extent and delamination, which is also an expression of fatigue related damage. With fine-ground poppy seed slurry only the microfilled composite with large prepolymer particles showed catastrophic failure. In all other cases the small poppy seed fragments in the slurry abraded the surfaces, removing polymer or fine particle loaded matrix uniformly. Supposedly, poppy seed slurry is a suitable third-body medium, simulating occlusal wear produced by food, rich in fibers or grain.

How to cite this article

Koottathape N, Takahashi H, Iwasaki N, Kanehira M, Finger WJ. Morphological Features of Composite Resin Surfaces after Two- and Three-Body Wear Simulation. World J Dent 2012;3(3):221-228.


PDF Share
  1. Resin composite: State of the art. Dent Mater 2011;27:29-38.
  2. Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices? Dent Mater 2006;22:689-92.
  3. Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent 2003;31:395-405.
  4. Nanohybrid vs fine hybrid composite in extended class II cavities after 6 years. Dent Mater 2011;27:455-64.
  5. Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: An 11 year follow-up. J Dent 2000;28:299-306.
  6. Composite resin fillings and inlays: An 11-year evaluation. Clin Oral Invest 2003;7:71-79.
  7. Two-year clinical performance of a nanofiller vs a fine-particle hybrid resin composite. Clin Oral Invest 2006;10:119-25.
  8. Nanohybrid vs fine hybrid composite in Class II cavities: Clinical results and marginal analysis after four years. Dent Mater 2009;25:750-59.
  9. Evaluation of the wear resistance of new nanocomposite resin restorative materials. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:435-43.
  10. Three-year randomized clinical trial to evaluate the clinical performance and wear of a nanocomposite versus a hybrid composite. Dent Mater 2009;25:1302-14.
  11. Nanofilled and microhybrid composite restorations: Five-year clinical wear performances. Dent Mater 2011;27:692-700.
  12. How to simulate wear? Overview of existing methods. Dent Mater 2006;22:693-701.
  13. Part 2. Wear by two-and/or three-body contact. Technical Specification 2001;14569-72.
  14. How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. Dent Mater 2006;22:712-34.
  15. Protection hypothesis for composite wear. Dent Mater 1992;8:305-09.
  16. Abrasion of class I restorative resins. Scand J Dent Res 1979;87:140-45.
  17. Intraoral restorative materials wear: Rethinking the current approaches: How to measure wear. Dent Mater 2006;22:702-11.
  18. Wear: Mechanisms, manifestations and measurement. Report of a workshop. J Dent 1996;24:141-48.
  19. Effects of cyclic loading on occlusal contact area wear of composite restoratives. Dent Mater 2002;18:149-58.
  20. Wear characteristics in a two-body wear test. Dent Mater 1994;10:269-74.
  21. Filler features and their effects on wear and degree of conversion of particulate dental resin composites. Biomaterials 2005;26:4932-37.
  22. Influence of filler loading on the two-body wear of a dental composite. J Oral Rehabil 2003;30:729-37.
  23. Evaluation of clinical performance for posterior composite resins and dentin adhesives. Oper Dent 1987;12:53-78.
  24. Clinical evaluation of four composite resins in posterior teeth: Five-year results. Aust Dent J 1991;36:369-73.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.