SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acta Odontologica Turcica / 2020 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1

Evaluation of microhardness and Bis-GMA release of a new composite restorative material

Yeni bir kompozit restoratif materyalin mikrosertlik ve Bis-GMA salımı yönünden değerlendirilmesi

Zeliha Gonca BEK KÜRKLÜ
Ceren KALKAN DEVECİ
Pages
18–23
Publication Date
2020-01-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The amount of eluted Bis-GMA monomers was higher in the NOVA Compo-HS composite than the Filtek Z250.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the microhardness, the degree of conversion and the elution of Bis-GMA of a new microhybrid composite for posterior restoration with a commonly used microhybrid composite material.Materials and Method: In this study, a newly manufactured composite resin material with a microhybrid filler content (NOVA Compo-HS, Imicryl, Konya, Turkey) and another commercially available composite resin material containing microhybrid filler (Filtek Z-250, 3M ESPE, St.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Paul, MN, USA) were used. 20 samples of each material were prepared in cylindrical form (2x2x2 mm).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The amount of eluted Bis-GMA monomers was higher in the NOVA Compo-HS composite than the Filtek Z250.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:20 samples
⚙️Variables:Bis-GMA · HPLC · kompozit dental rezin

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the microhardness, the degree of conversion and the elution of Bis-GMA of a new microhybrid composite for posterior restoration with a commonly used microhybrid composite material.Materials and Method: In this study, a newly manufactured composite resin material with a microhybrid filler content (NOVA Compo-HS, Imicryl, Konya, Turkey) and another commercially available composite resin material containing microhybrid filler (Filtek Z-250, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, USA) were used. 20 samples of each material were prepared in cylindrical form (2x2x2 mm). The amount of the eluted Bis-GMA from ten of the 20 samples for each material was analyzed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) (Shimadzu, Model SPD 20A, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan). The Vickers surface microhardness of the other remaining ten of 20 samples for each material was measured and the polymerization depth was evaluated by calculating the Vickers hardness ratio. The statistical analysis was performed with two independent samples t-test.Results: There were differences between NOVA Compo-HS and Filtek Z250 in hardness values recorded on the upper and lower surfaces (p<0.001). The amount of eluted Bis-GMA monomer from NOVA Compo-HS and Filtek Z250 was 1.28 mg/L and 0.78 mg/L. There was a statistically difference between the groups (p<0.001). Conclusion: NOVA Compo-HS, a new composite resin material with microfiller, was not found as sufficient as the other microfiller composite for the mechanical properties (surface microhardness and the ratio of bottom/top surface hardness values). The amount of eluted Bis-GMA monomers was higher in the NOVA Compo-HS composite than the Filtek Z250.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı posterior restorasyon için üretilen yeni mikrohibrit bir kompozitin mikrosertlik, dönüşüm derecesi ve Bis-GMA salımını sıkça kullanılan mikrohibrit bir kompozit materyal ile karşılaştırmaktır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Bu çalışmada mikrohibrit doldurucu içerikli yeni üretilmiş (NOVA Compo-HS, Imicryl, Konya, Türkiye) ve piyasada bulunan mikrohibrit doldurucu içeren başka bir kompozit rezin materyeli (Filtek Z-250, 3M ESPE, St. Paul, MN, ABD) kullanıldı. Her bir materyalden silindir şeklinde (2x2x2 mm boyutlarında) 20’şer örnek hazırlandı. Her materyal için hazırlanan 20 örnekten 10 adetinde salınan Bis-GMA miktarı yüksek performanslı sıvı kromatografisi (HPLC) (Shimadzu, Model SPD 20A, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japonya) ile analiz edildi. Her materyal için geri kalan diğer 10 örneğin Vickers yüzey mikrosertlik dereceleri ölçüldü ve polimerizasyon derinliği Vickers sertlik oranı hesaplanarak değerlendirildi. İstatistiksel analizler bağımsız gruplar t-testi ile yapıldı.Bulgular: NOVA Compo-HS ve Filtek Z250 arasında üst ve alt yüzeylerde kaydedilen sertlik değerlerinde istatistiksel bir fark olduğu görüldü (p<0.001). NOVA Compo-HS ve Filtek Z250 kompozitlerine ait Bis-GMA salım miktarı ortalama 1.28 mg/L ve 0.78 mg/L idi. Gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak fark vardı (p<0.001). Sonuç: Mikro dolduruculu yeni kompozit rezin materyal olan NOVA Compo-HS, mekanik özellikleri (yüzey mikrosertlik dereceleri ve alt/üst yüzeyin Vickers mikrosertlik oranı) bakımından diğer mikro dolduruculu kompozit kadar yeterli bulunmadı. NOVA Compo-HS kompozitten salınan Bis-GMA monomer miktarı, Filtek Z250’ye göre daha fazlaydı.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÜRKLÜ, Z. G. B., DEVECİ, C. K. (2020). Evaluation of microhardness and Bis-GMA release of a new composite restorative material. Acta Odontologica Turcica, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 1, 18–23. https://ajindex.com/articles/265317

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Asmussen E. Factors affecting the quantity of remaining double bonds in restorative resin polymers. Scand J Dent Res 1982;90:490-6.
  2. Imazato S, McCabe JF, Tarumi H, Ehara A, Ebisu S. Degreeof conversion of composites measured by DTA and FTIR. Dent Mater 2001;17:178-83.
  3. Hume WR, Gerzina TM. Bioavailability of components of resin-based materials which are applied to teeth. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 1996;7:172-9.
  4. Nathanson D, Lertpitayakun P, Lamkin MS, Edalatpour M, Chou LI. In-vitro elution of leachable components from dental sealants. J Am Dent Assoc 1997;128:1517-23.
  5. Geurtsen W, Lehmann F, Spahl W, Leyhausen G. Cytotoxicity of 35 dental resin composite monomers/additives in permanent 3T3 and three human primary fibroblast cultures. J Biomed Mater Res 1998;41:474-80.
  6. Schweikl H, Schmalz G. Triethylene glycol dimethacrylateinduces large deletions in the HPRT gene of V79 cells. Mutat Res 1999;438:71-8.
  7. Munksgaard EC, Freund M. Enzymatic hydrolysis of (di)me-thacrylates and their polymers. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98:261-7.
  8. Wataha JC, Hanks CT, Strawn SE, Fat JC. Cytotoxicity ofcomponents of resins and other dental restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil 1994;21:453-62.
  9. Wataha JC, Rueggeberg FA, Lapp CA, Lewis JB, LockwoodPE, Ergle JW, et al. In vitro cytotoxicity of resin-containing restorative materials after aging in artificial saliva. Clin Oral Invest 1999;3:144-9.
  10. Hanks CT, Wataha JC, Sun ZL. In vitro models of biocompatibility: A review. Dent Mater 1996;12:186-93. Konradsson K, van Dijken JW. Interleukin-1 levels in gingival crevicular fluid adjacent to restorations of calcium aluminate cement and resin composite. J Clin Periodontol 2005;32:462-6.
  11. Moszner N, Ulrich S. New developments of polymeric dental composites. Prog Polym Sci 2001;26:535-76.
  12. Heil J, Reifferscheild G, Waldmann P, Leyhausen G, Geurtsen W. Genotoxicity of dental materials. Mutat Res 1996;368:181-94. Ferracane JL. Correlation between hardness and degree of conversion during the setting reaction of unfilled dental restorative resins. Dent Mater 1985;1:11-4. Anusavice KJ. Physical properties of dental materials. In: Anusavice K, Shen C, Rawls HR, editors. Phillips' science of dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier Inc., 2013. p.63-4.
  13. Mousavinasab SM, Meyers I. Comparison of depth of cure, hardness and heat generation of LED and high intensity QTH light sources. Eur J Dent 2011;5:299-304.
  14. Galvao MR, Caldas SG, Bagnato VS, Rastelli AN, Andrade MF. Evaluation of degree of conver