Comparative Evaluation of the Surface Hardness of Monochrome Composite and Conventional Composite after Immersion in Food-simulating Liquids: An In Vitro Study
Citation Information :
Bahgat HA, Hanna NM. Comparative Evaluation of the Surface Hardness of Monochrome Composite and Conventional Composite after Immersion in Food-simulating Liquids: An In Vitro Study. Int J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2024; 14 (1):39-44.
Purpose: To compare the surface hardness of monochrome (single shade) and conventional composite resins after exposure to food-simulating liquids.
Materials and methods: A total of 50 disk-shaped specimens of composite resin (n = 25 estelite alpha and n = 25 omnichroma) were fabricated in split teflon mold (15 mm diameter, 2 mm thickness). The specimens were divided into subgroups (n = 5/subgroup). The first subgroup acted as the control and incubated dry at 37 ± 0.5°C in darkness for 1 week. Each specimen of the other four subgroups was immersed separately into a tightly closed glass test tube with 2 mL of each solution of the four different food-simulating liquids (artificial saliva, citric acid 0.02%, heptane 50%, and 50% ethanol) and incubated at 37± 0.5°C in darkness, with daily manual agitation for 1 week. Vickers hardness number (VHN) was then measured for each specimen under a load of 0.49N and a dwell time of 15 seconds. The unpaired t-test was used to compare the two groups, while comparisons between >2 groups were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with multiple comparisons post hoc Tukey test.
Results: Omnichroma showed significantly higher Vickers hardness values in each storage condition than estelite alpha. Both omnichroma and estelilte alpha showed a reduction in the Vickers microhardness values in different solutions when compared to the dry condition. One-way ANOVA showed a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the subgroups of both composites. Estelilte alpha showed the greatest reduction in the Vickers microhardness values in the dry condition (21.94 ± 0.54 kgf/mm2) and the least value (15.92 ± 0.65 kgf/mm2) when immersed in 50% ethanol. Omnichroma also showed the greatest Vickers microhardness values in the dry condition (28.04 ± 0.99 kgf/mm2) and the least after immersion in 50% ethanol (21.90 ± 0.63 kgf/mm2).
Conclusion: The 50% ethanol was the most critical food-simulating liquid, causing degradation in both composites. The resin formulation of urethane dimethacrylate/triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (UDMA/TEGDMA) of monochromatic composite showed better stability in surface hardness properties after exposure to different food-simulating liquids. The inclusion of prepolymerized filler in the nanohybrid composite had a negative impact on the surface hardness.
De Abreu JLB, Sampaio CS, Benalcázar Jalkh EB, et al. Analysis of the color matching of universal resin composites in anterior restorations. J Esthet Restor Dent 2021;33(2):269–276. DOI: 10.1111/jerd.12659
El- Refai D. Can omnichroma revoke other restorative composites? Mechanical and physical assessment of omnichroma dental resin restorative composite: an in- vitro study. Egypt Dent J 2022;68(4):3701–3716. DOI: 10.21608/EDJ.2022.157174.2222
Wu W, McKinney JE. Influence of chemicals on wear of dental composites. J Dent Res 1982;61(10):1180–1183. DOI: 10.1177/00220345820610101501
McKinney JE, Wu W. Chemical softening, and wear of dental composites. J Dent Res 1985;64(11):1326–1331. DOI: 10.1177/00220345850640111601
Administration FAD. FDA guidelines for chemistry and technology requirements of indirect additive petitions. Washington: FDA; 1976. U.S. --- Food & Drug Administration Center for Food Safety & Applied. Nutrition; Office of Premarket Approval; 2001;1–19.
Nair KC, Dathan PC, SB S, et al. Hardness of dental materials is an essential property that determines the life of restorations - an overview. Acta Sci Dent Sci 2022;6(12):129–134. DOI: 10.31080/ASDS.2022.06.1523
Büyükgöze Dindar M, Tekbaş Atay M. Investigation of short and long term effects of various mouthwashes on the color stability of hybrid composites. Bezmial Sci 2022;10(6):756–762. DOI: 10.14235/bas.galenos.2021.76476
Beyth N, Bahir R, Matalon S, et al. Streptococcus mutans biofilm changes surface–topography of resin composites. Dent Mater 2008;24(6):732–736. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2007.08.003
Chan YH. Biostatistics102: quantitative data – parametric & non-parametric tests. Singapore Med J 2003;44(8):391–396.
Hunter G, Lane DM, Scrimgeour SN, et al. Measurement of the diffusion of liquids into dental restorative resins by stray-field nuclear magnetic resonance imaging (STRAFI). Dent Mater 2003;19(7):632–638. DOI: 10.1016/s0109-5641(03)00006-x
Sideridou ID, Karabela MM, Vouvoudi EC. Physical properties of current dental nanohybrid and nanofill light–cured resin composites. Dent Mater 2011;27(6):598–607. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.02.015
Szczesio-Wlodarczyk A, Sokolowski J, Kleczewska J, et al. Ageing of dental composites based on methacrylate resins-a critical review of the causes and method of assessment. Polymers (Basel) 2020;12(4):882–890. DOI: 10.3390/polym12040882
Cabadag ÖG, Gönülol N. The effects of food-simulating liquids on surface roughness, surface hardness, and solubility of bulk-fill composites. J Adv Oral Res 2021;12(2):245–253. DOI: 10.1177/2320206820988451
Kumari CM, Bhat KM, Bansal R, et al. Evaluation of surface roughness and hardness of newer nanoposterior composite resins after immersion in food-simulating liquids. Contemp Clin Dent 2019;10(2):289–293. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_535_18
Sunbul HA, Silikas N, Watts DC. Surface and bulk properties of dental resin- composites after solvent storage. Dent Mater 2016;32(8):987–997. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.05.007
Farahat DS, El-Wassefy NA. Effects of food-simulating solutions on the surface properties of two CAD/CAM resin composites. J Clin Exp Dent 2022;14(10):782–790. DOI: 10.4317/jced.59822
Barszczewska-Rybarek IM. Structure–property relationships in di-methacrylate networks based on Bis-GMA, UDMA and TEGDMA. Dent Mater 2009;25:1082–1089. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2009.01.106
Szczesio-Wlodarczyk A, Domarecka M, Kopacz K, et al. An evaluation of the properties of urethane di-methacrylate-based dental resins. Materials 2021;14(11):2727. DOI: 10.3390/ma14112727
Blackham JT, Vandewalle KS, Lien W. Properties of hybrid resin composite systems containing pre-polymerized filler particles. Oper Dent 2009;34(6):697–702. DOI: 10.2341/08-118-L