Restor Dent Endod.  2020 May;45(2):e13. 10.5395/rde.2020.45.e13.

Influence of modeling agents on the surface properties of an esthetic nano-hybrid composite

• Kutuk ZB
• Erden E
• Aksahin DL
• Durak ZE
• Dulda AC

• KMID: 2503509
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2020.45.e13

Abstract

Objective
The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different modeling agents on the surface microhardness (Vickers hardness number; VHN), roughness (Ra), and color change (ΔE) of a nano-hybrid composite with or without exposure to discoloration by coffee.
Materials and Methods
Sixty-four cylinder-shaped nano-hybrid composite specimens were prepared using a Teflon mold. The specimens' surfaces were prepared according to the following groups: group 1, no modeling agent; group 2, Modeling Liquid; group 3, a universal adhesive (G-Premio Bond); and group 4, the first step of a 2-step self-adhesive system (OptiBond XTR). Specimens were randomly allocated into 2 groups (n = 8) according to the storage medium (distilled water or coffee). VHN, Ra, and ΔE were measured at 24 hours, 1 week, and 6 weeks. The Kruskal-Wallis test followed by the Bonferroni correction for pairwise comparisons was used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05).
Results
Storage time did not influence the VHN of the nano-hybrid composite in any group (p > 0.05). OptiBond XTR Primer application affected the VHN negatively in all investigated storage medium and time conditions (p < 0.05). Modeling Liquid application yielded improved Ra values for the specimens stored in coffee at each time point (p < 0.05). Modeling Liquid application was associated with the lowest ΔE values in all investigated storage medium and time conditions (p < 0.05).
Conclusion
Different types of modeling agents could affect the surface properties and discoloration of nano-hybrid composites.

Keyword

Color change; Microhardness; Modeling agents; Nano-hybrid composite; Surface roughness

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Scanning electron microscopy images showing the surface topography of nano-hybrid composite specimens at ×2,000 magnification. (A-C) show control group specimens stored in distilled water for 24 hours, stored in distilled water for 6 weeks, and stored in coffee for 6 weeks, respectively. (D-F) show Modeling Liquid group specimens stored in distilled water for 24 hours, stored in distilled water for 6 weeks, and stored in coffee for 6 weeks. (G-I) show universal adhesive group specimens stored in distilled water for 24 hours, stored in distilled water for 6 weeks, and stored in coffee for 6 weeks. (J-L) show specimens from the primer of the 2-step self-etch adhesive group stored in distilled water for 24 hours, stored in distilled water for 6 weeks, and stored in coffee for 6 weeks, respectively.WD, working distance; HV, high voltage; HFW, horizontal frame width.

Reference

1. Rosa WL, Piva E, Silva AF. Bond strength of universal adhesives: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2015; 43:765–776. PMID: 25882585.

2. Nahsan FP, Mondelli RF, Franco EB, Naufel FS, Ueda JK, Schmitt VL, Baseggio W. Clinical strategies for esthetic excellence in anterior tooth restorations: understanding color and composite resin selection. J Appl Oral Sci. 2012; 20:151–156. PMID: 22666829.

3. Pontons-Melo JC, Furuse AY, Mondelli J. A direct composite resin stratification technique for restoration of the smile. Quintessence Int. 2011; 42:205–211. PMID: 21465007.

4. Sedrez-Porto JA, Münchow EA, Brondani LP, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Effects of modeling liquid/resin and polishing on the color change of resin composite. Braz Oral Res. 2016; 30:1–9.

5. Sedrez-Porto JA, Münchow EA, Cenci MS, Pereira-Cenci T. Translucency and color stability of resin composite and dental adhesives as modeling liquids - A one-year evaluation. Braz Oral Res. 2017; 31:e54. PMID: 28678973.

6. Dunn WJ, Strong TC. Effect of alcohol and unfilled resin in the incremental buildup of resin composite. Quintessence Int. 2007; 38:e20–e26. PMID: 17508071.

7. Barcellos DC, Pucci CR, Torres CR, Goto EH, Inocencio AC. Effects of resinous monomers used in restorative dental modeling on the cohesive strength of composite resin. J Adhes Dent. 2008; 10:351–354. PMID: 19058680.

8. Perdigăo J, Gomes G. Effect of instrument lubricant on the cohesive strength of a hybrid resin composite. Quintessence Int. 2006; 37:621–625. PMID: 16922021.

9. Bertrand MF, Leforestier E, Muller M, Lupi-Pégurier L, Bolla M. Effect of surface penetrating sealant on surface texture and microhardness of composite resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 2000; 53:658–663. PMID: 11074424.

10. Tuncer S, Demirci M, Tiryaki M, Unlü N, Uysal Ö. The effect of a modeling resin and thermocycling on the surface hardness, roughness, and color of different resin composites. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2013; 25:404–419. PMID: 24172016.

11. Münchow EA, Sedrez-Porto JA, Piva E, Pereira-Cenci T, Cenci MS. Use of dental adhesives as modeler liquid of resin composites. Dent Mater. 2016; 32:570–577. PMID: 26850844.

12. Ye Q, Spencer P, Wang Y, Misra A. Relationship of solvent to the photopolymerization process, properties, and structure in model dentin adhesives. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2007; 80:342–350. PMID: 17001655.

13. Perez CR, Hirata RJ, da Silva AH, Sampaio EM, de Miranda MS. Effect of a glaze/composite sealant on the 3-D surface roughness of esthetic restorative materials. Oper Dent. 2009; 34:674–680. PMID: 19953776.

14. Lowe RA. Using BisCover surface sealant/polish on direct and indirect composite and bisacrylic provisional restorations. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2004; 25:400–401. PMID: 15181781.

15. Bollen CM, Papaioanno W, Van Eldere J, Schepers E, Quirynen M, van Steenberghe D. The influence of abutment surface roughness on plaque accumulation and peri-implant mucositis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 1996; 7:201–211. PMID: 9151584.

16. Roselino LM, Cruvinel DR, Chinelatti MA, Pires-de-Souza FC. Effect of brushing and accelerated ageing on color stability and surface roughness of composites. J Dent. 2013; 41(Supplement 5):e54–e61. PMID: 23851131.

17. Catelan A, Briso AL, Sundfeld RH, Dos Santos PH. Effect of artificial aging on the roughness and microhardness of sealed composites. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2010; 22:324–330. PMID: 21029336.

18. Ferracane JL. Resin composite--state of the art. Dent Mater. 2011; 27:29–38. PMID: 21093034.

19. Ghinea R, Pérez MM, Herrera LJ, Rivas MJ, Yebra A, Paravina RD. Color difference thresholds in dental ceramics. J Dent. 2010; 38(Supplement 2):e57–e64. PMID: 20670670.

20. Biradar B, Biradar S, Ms A. Evaluation of the effect of water on three different light cured composite restorative materials stored in water: an in vitro study. Int J Dent. 2012; 2012:640942. PMID: 22315607.

21. Patel J, Granger C, Parker S, Patel M. The effect of instrument lubricant on the diametral tensile strength and water uptake of posterior composite restorative material. J Dent. 2017; 56:33–38. PMID: 27746333.

22. Araujo FS, Barros MC, Santana ML, de Jesus Oliveira LS, Silva PF, Lima GD, Faria-E-Silva AL. Effects of adhesive used as modeling liquid on the stability of the color and opacity of composites. J Esthet Restor Dent. 2018; 30:427–433. PMID: 29607618.

23. Prodan DA, Gasparik C, Mada DC, Miclăuş V, Băciuţ M, Dudea D. Influence of opacity on the color stability of a nanocomposite. Clin Oral Investig. 2015; 19:867–875.