Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time

Steven J. Naoum, Ayman Ellakwa, Leah Morgan, Karina White, F. Elizabeth Martin, In Bog Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In this study, the hypothesis that the polymerization shrinkage profile of "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite; Silorane and "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite; Kalore is not different from that of three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II) was tested.

METHODS: Five commercially available composites were analysed: one "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite (Silorane); one "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite (Kalore) and three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II). Polymerization shrinkage was measured using an electromagnetic balance which recorded changes in composite buoyancy occurring due to volumetric changes during polymerization. This instrument allowed real time volumetric shrinkage measurements to be made at 40 ms intervals.

RESULTS: All five resin composites demonstrated a similar volumetric shrinkage profile during polymerization. The rate of shrinkage of all five composites decreased from t=0 at a rate approximating x=t. After 170 s the rate of shrinkage of all five composites was at or below 0.01%/s. During the initial 5s of light exposure Silorane and Kalore exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) rate of contraction relative to the three conventional methacrylate composites. After 640 s of analysis, Silorane exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) percentage volumetric contraction compared to the other four analysed materials.

CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed "low shrinkage" composites (Silorane, Kalore) in the present study demonstrated significantly lower (p<0.05) shrinkage rates and shrinkage volumes compared to the three conventional methacrylate composites. Investigation to identify whether polymerization shrinkage profile analysis is a good predictor of relative polymerization contraction stress levels generated by different composites, is warranted.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians making a resin composite selection with the view to minimizing the clinical effects of polymerization shrinkage must consider the rate of polymerization as well as the total volumetric shrinkage of a composite. Silorane (non methacrylate composite) and Kalore (high molecular mass methacrylate composite) have the ability to exhibit lower shrinkage rates and lower shrinkage volumes compared to conventional methacrylate composites.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)64-70
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Dentistry
Volume40
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dental Materials
Methacrylates
Silorane Resins
Polymerization
Composite Resins
profile resin
Electromagnetic Phenomena
Light

Cite this

Naoum, Steven J. ; Ellakwa, Ayman ; Morgan, Leah ; White, Karina ; Martin, F. Elizabeth ; Lee, In Bog. / Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time. In: Journal of Dentistry. 2012 ; Vol. 40, No. 1. pp. 64-70.
@article{deba338539ca4f178e318372f2c9b0f6,
title = "Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: In this study, the hypothesis that the polymerization shrinkage profile of {"}low shrinkage{"} non-methacrylate based composite; Silorane and {"}low shrinkage{"} high molecular mass methacrylate based composite; Kalore is not different from that of three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II) was tested.METHODS: Five commercially available composites were analysed: one {"}low shrinkage{"} non-methacrylate based composite (Silorane); one {"}low shrinkage{"} high molecular mass methacrylate based composite (Kalore) and three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II). Polymerization shrinkage was measured using an electromagnetic balance which recorded changes in composite buoyancy occurring due to volumetric changes during polymerization. This instrument allowed real time volumetric shrinkage measurements to be made at 40 ms intervals.RESULTS: All five resin composites demonstrated a similar volumetric shrinkage profile during polymerization. The rate of shrinkage of all five composites decreased from t=0 at a rate approximating x=t. After 170 s the rate of shrinkage of all five composites was at or below 0.01{\%}/s. During the initial 5s of light exposure Silorane and Kalore exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) rate of contraction relative to the three conventional methacrylate composites. After 640 s of analysis, Silorane exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) percentage volumetric contraction compared to the other four analysed materials.CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed {"}low shrinkage{"} composites (Silorane, Kalore) in the present study demonstrated significantly lower (p<0.05) shrinkage rates and shrinkage volumes compared to the three conventional methacrylate composites. Investigation to identify whether polymerization shrinkage profile analysis is a good predictor of relative polymerization contraction stress levels generated by different composites, is warranted.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians making a resin composite selection with the view to minimizing the clinical effects of polymerization shrinkage must consider the rate of polymerization as well as the total volumetric shrinkage of a composite. Silorane (non methacrylate composite) and Kalore (high molecular mass methacrylate composite) have the ability to exhibit lower shrinkage rates and lower shrinkage volumes compared to conventional methacrylate composites.",
keywords = "Composite Resins/chemistry, Dental Restoration, Permanent, Dental Stress Analysis, Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives, Methacrylates/chemistry, Polymerization, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Silorane Resins, Siloxanes/chemistry, Stress, Mechanical",
author = "Naoum, {Steven J.} and Ayman Ellakwa and Leah Morgan and Karina White and Martin, {F. Elizabeth} and Lee, {In Bog}",
note = "Crown Copyright {\circledC} 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jdent.2011.10.006",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "64--70",
journal = "Journal of Dentistry",
issn = "0300-5712",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time. / Naoum, Steven J.; Ellakwa, Ayman; Morgan, Leah; White, Karina; Martin, F. Elizabeth; Lee, In Bog.

In: Journal of Dentistry, Vol. 40, No. 1, 01.2012, p. 64-70.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Polymerization profile analysis of resin composite dental restorative materials in real time

AU - Naoum, Steven J.

AU - Ellakwa, Ayman

AU - Morgan, Leah

AU - White, Karina

AU - Martin, F. Elizabeth

AU - Lee, In Bog

N1 - Crown Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - OBJECTIVES: In this study, the hypothesis that the polymerization shrinkage profile of "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite; Silorane and "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite; Kalore is not different from that of three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II) was tested.METHODS: Five commercially available composites were analysed: one "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite (Silorane); one "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite (Kalore) and three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II). Polymerization shrinkage was measured using an electromagnetic balance which recorded changes in composite buoyancy occurring due to volumetric changes during polymerization. This instrument allowed real time volumetric shrinkage measurements to be made at 40 ms intervals.RESULTS: All five resin composites demonstrated a similar volumetric shrinkage profile during polymerization. The rate of shrinkage of all five composites decreased from t=0 at a rate approximating x=t. After 170 s the rate of shrinkage of all five composites was at or below 0.01%/s. During the initial 5s of light exposure Silorane and Kalore exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) rate of contraction relative to the three conventional methacrylate composites. After 640 s of analysis, Silorane exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) percentage volumetric contraction compared to the other four analysed materials.CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed "low shrinkage" composites (Silorane, Kalore) in the present study demonstrated significantly lower (p<0.05) shrinkage rates and shrinkage volumes compared to the three conventional methacrylate composites. Investigation to identify whether polymerization shrinkage profile analysis is a good predictor of relative polymerization contraction stress levels generated by different composites, is warranted.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians making a resin composite selection with the view to minimizing the clinical effects of polymerization shrinkage must consider the rate of polymerization as well as the total volumetric shrinkage of a composite. Silorane (non methacrylate composite) and Kalore (high molecular mass methacrylate composite) have the ability to exhibit lower shrinkage rates and lower shrinkage volumes compared to conventional methacrylate composites.

AB - OBJECTIVES: In this study, the hypothesis that the polymerization shrinkage profile of "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite; Silorane and "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite; Kalore is not different from that of three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II) was tested.METHODS: Five commercially available composites were analysed: one "low shrinkage" non-methacrylate based composite (Silorane); one "low shrinkage" high molecular mass methacrylate based composite (Kalore) and three conventional methacrylate based composites (Gradia Direct X, Filtek Supreme XT and Beautifil II). Polymerization shrinkage was measured using an electromagnetic balance which recorded changes in composite buoyancy occurring due to volumetric changes during polymerization. This instrument allowed real time volumetric shrinkage measurements to be made at 40 ms intervals.RESULTS: All five resin composites demonstrated a similar volumetric shrinkage profile during polymerization. The rate of shrinkage of all five composites decreased from t=0 at a rate approximating x=t. After 170 s the rate of shrinkage of all five composites was at or below 0.01%/s. During the initial 5s of light exposure Silorane and Kalore exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) rate of contraction relative to the three conventional methacrylate composites. After 640 s of analysis, Silorane exhibited a significantly lower (p<0.05) percentage volumetric contraction compared to the other four analysed materials.CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed "low shrinkage" composites (Silorane, Kalore) in the present study demonstrated significantly lower (p<0.05) shrinkage rates and shrinkage volumes compared to the three conventional methacrylate composites. Investigation to identify whether polymerization shrinkage profile analysis is a good predictor of relative polymerization contraction stress levels generated by different composites, is warranted.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Clinicians making a resin composite selection with the view to minimizing the clinical effects of polymerization shrinkage must consider the rate of polymerization as well as the total volumetric shrinkage of a composite. Silorane (non methacrylate composite) and Kalore (high molecular mass methacrylate composite) have the ability to exhibit lower shrinkage rates and lower shrinkage volumes compared to conventional methacrylate composites.

KW - Composite Resins/chemistry

KW - Dental Restoration, Permanent

KW - Dental Stress Analysis

KW - Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives

KW - Methacrylates/chemistry

KW - Polymerization

KW - Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted

KW - Silorane Resins

KW - Siloxanes/chemistry

KW - Stress, Mechanical

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84655167707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.10.006

DO - 10.1016/j.jdent.2011.10.006

M3 - Article

VL - 40

SP - 64

EP - 70

JO - Journal of Dentistry

JF - Journal of Dentistry

SN - 0300-5712

IS - 1

ER -