restorative composite resins
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Restorative Composite ResinsRestorative Composite Resins
![Page 2: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Overview
• Direct restoratives– composition– classification– performance factors
• Flowable
• Packables
Click here for briefing on composite resins (PDF)
![Page 3: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Composite• Material with two or more distinct substances
– metals, ceramics or polymers
• Dental resin composite– soft organic-resin matrix
• polymer
– hard, inorganic-filler particles• ceramic
• Most frequently used– esthetic-restorative material
![Page 4: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
History
• 1871 – silicates– alumina-silica glass &
phosphoric acid– very soluble– poor mechanical properties
• 1948 - acrylic resins – polymethylmethacrylate– high polymerization shrinkage
Rueggeberg J Prosthet Dent 2002
![Page 5: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
History(cont.)
• 1962 – Bis-GMA– stronger resin
• 1969 – filled composite resin– improved mechanical properties– less shrinkage– paste/paste system
• 1970’s – acid etching and microfills• 1980’s – light curing and hybrids• 1990’s – flowables and packables• 2000’s – nanofills
Rueggeberg J Prosthet Dent 2002
![Page 6: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Indications
• Anterior restorations
• Posterior restorations– preventive resin– conservative class 1 or 2
![Page 7: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Contraindications
• Large posterior restorations
• Bruxism
• Poor isolation
![Page 8: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Advantages
• Esthetics
• Conservation of tooth structure
• Adhesion to tooth structure
• Low thermal conductivity
• Alternative to amalgam
![Page 9: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Disadvantages
• Technique sensitivity
• Polymerization shrinkage – marginal leakage– secondary caries– postoperative sensitivity
• Decreased wear resistance
![Page 10: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Composition• Resin matrix
– monomer– initiator– inhibitors– pigments
• Inorganic filler– glass– quartz– colloidal silica
• Coupling Agent
OCH2CHCH2O-C-C=CH2CH2=C-C-O-CH2CH-CH2O -C-
CH3 CH3
CH3
CH3OH OH
O O
Bis-GMA
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 11: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Monomers• Binds filler particles together• Provides “workability”• Typical monomers
– Bisphenol A glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA)
– Urethane dimethacrylate (UEDMA)
– Triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGMA)CH2=C-C-O-CH2CH2-O-C-NHCH2CH2CHCH2-C-CH2-NH-C-
CH3
CH3
OCH2CH2O-C-C=CH2
CH3
O OOO
CH3
CH3
OCH2CHCH2O-C-C=CH2CH2=C-C-O-CH2CH-CH2O -C-
CH3 CH3
CH3
CH3OH OH
O O
CH2=C-C-O-CH2CH2-OCH2CH2
CH3
OCH2CH2O-C-C=CH2
CH3
O O
![Page 12: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Filler Particles
• Crystalline quartz– larger particles– not polishable
• Silica glass– barium– strontium– lithium– pyrolytic
• sub-micron
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 13: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Filler Particles
• Increase fillers, increase mechanical properties– strength– abrasion resistance– esthetics– handling
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Fra
ctur
e T
ough
ness
0 28 37 48 53 62
% Filler Volume
Ferracane J Dent Res 1995
![Page 14: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Coupling Agent
• Chemical bond– filler particle - resin matrix
• transfers stresses
• Organosilane (bifunctional molecule)– siloxane end bonds to hydroxyl groups on filler– methacrylate end polymerizes with resin
CH3-C-C-O-CH2-CH2-CH2-Si-OH
CH2
O OH
OH
Bonds with filler
Silane
Bis-GMABonds with resin
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 15: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Inhibitors
• Prevents spontaneous polymer formation– heat– light
• Extends shelf life
• Butylated Hydroxytoluene
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 16: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Pigments and UV Absorbers
• Pigments– metal oxides
• provide shading and opacity• titanium and aluminum oxides
• UV absorbers– prevent discoloration– acts like a “sunscreen”
• Benzophenone
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 17: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Polymerization
• Initiation– production of reactive free radicals
• typically with light for restorative materials
• Propagation– hundreds of monomer units– polymer network– 50 – 60% degree of conversion
• Termination
Craig Restorative Dental Materials 2002
![Page 18: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
C=C
C=C C=C
C=C C=C C=C C=C
C=C C=C
C=C C=CC=C C=C
C=C C=C
C=C C=C
C=C
C=C
C=CC=C
C=C
C=C
C=C C=C C=CC=C C=C
C=C
C=C
polymerization
Ferracane
![Page 19: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Classification System
• Historical
• Chronological
• Based on particle size– traditional– microfilled– small particle – hybrid
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 20: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Traditional (Macrofilled)• Developed in the 1970s• Crystalline quartz
– produced by grinding or milling– large - 8 to 12 microns
• Difficult to polish– large particles prone to pluck
• Poor wear resistance• Fracture resistant• Examples: Adaptic, Concise• Suitable for Class 3, 4 and 5
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 21: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Microfills
• Better esthetics and polishability• Tiny particles
– 0.04 micron colloidal silica– increases viscosity
• To increase filler loading– filler added to resin– heat cured– ground to large particles– remixed with more resin and filler
Ground polymer with colloidal silica (50 u)
Polymer matrix with colloidal silica
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 22: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Microfills• Lower filler content
– inferior properties• increased fracture potential• lacks coupling agent• lacks radiopacity
• Linear clinical wear pattern
• Suitable for Class 3, 5– exceptions with reinforced microfills
• Class 1 or 2
Click here for table of microfills
![Page 23: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Small Particle
• 1 - 5 micron heavy-metalglasses
• Fracture resistant
• Polishable to semi-gloss
• Suitable for Class 1 to 5
• Example: Prisma-Fil
Silane-coated silica or glass (1-5 u)
Polymer matrix
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 24: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Hybrids
• Popular as “all-purpose”– AKA universal hybrid, microhybrids,
microfilled hybrids
• 0.6 to 1 micron average particle size– distribution of particle sizes
• maximizes filler loading
– microfills added • improve handling• reduce stickiness
Silane-coated silica or glass
Polymer matrix with colloidal silica
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 25: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Hybrids
• Strong
• Good esthetics– polishable
• Suitable– Class 1 to 5
• Multiple available
Click here for table of hybrids
![Page 26: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Property Traditional MicrofilledSmall
ParticleHybrid
Compressive strength (MPa)
250-300 250-300 350-400 300-350
Tensile strength (MPa) 50-65 30-50 75-90 70-90
Elastic Modulus (GPa) 8-15 3-6 15-20 7-12
Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (10-6/ºC)
25-35 50-60 19-26 30-40
Knoop Hardness 55 5-30 50-60 50-60
Table of Properties
![Page 27: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Newer Classification System
• Based on particle size– megafill
• 0.5 - 2 millimeters
– macrofill• 10 - 100 microns
– midifill• 1 - 10 microns
– minifill• 0.1 - 1 microns
– microfill• 0.01 - 0.1 microns
– nanofill• 0.005-0.01 microns
• Most new systems– minifillers
• Newest trend – nanofillers– trimodal loading
• prepolymerized
Bayne JADA 1994
![Page 28: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Midi-filler -2 um (beachball)
Mini -filler -0.6 um (canteloupe)
Nanofiller -.02 um (pea)
Microfiller -.04 um (marble)
Relative Particle Sizes (not to scale)
![Page 29: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Nanofilled Composite
• Filtek Supreme (3M ESPE)
• Filler particles– filled: 78% wgt– nanomers
• 0.02 – 0.07 microns
– nanocluster• act as single unit
– 0.6 – 1.4 microns
Click here for technical profile Click here for DECS evaluation
![Page 30: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Performance Factors
• Material factors– biocompatibility– polymerization shrinkage– wear resistance– polish mechanisms– placement types – mechanical & physical properties
![Page 31: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Biocompatibility
• Tolerated by pulp– with good seal
• Rare allergic reactions– HEMA
• Cytotoxicity– short lived
• not a chronic source
• Degree of cure important– decrease free monomer
Phillip’s Science of Dental Materials 2003
![Page 32: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Systemic• Estrogenic effects seen in cell cultures
– impurities in Bis-GMA-based resins• Bis-phenol A in sealants
– Olea EHP 1996» click here for abstract
– however, insignificant short-term risk
• literature review– Soderholm JADA 1999
» click here for abstract
![Page 33: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Polymerization Shrinkage
• Significant role in restoration failure– gap formation
• secondary caries formation• marginal leakage• post-operative sensitivity
• Counteract– lower shrinkage composites– incremental placement
![Page 34: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Composite Wear• Less wear
– small particle size• less abrasion
– heavier filled• less attrition
– non-contact areas• 3 - 5 times less
– less surface area– anterior location
• premolars vs. molars
Hilton Oper Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach 2001
![Page 35: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Composite Wear
• Reduced wear with smaller particles– less plucking leaving voids
• Higher filler loads for enhanced properties– correlations between wear and fracture
toughness and flexure strength
• Higher cure of resin matrix to resist scratching and gouging by abrasives
Hilton Oper Dentistry: A Contemporary Approach 2001
![Page 36: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Polish Mechanisms
• Acquired polish– clinician induced
• Inherent polish– ultimate surface
• Microfills– high acquired, high inherent
• similar resin matrix and fillers wear more evenly
• Hybrids– high acquired, acceptable inherent
Adept Report 1992
![Page 37: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Shaded vs. Anatomic Placement
• Shaded– shade selected from middle
third of tooth– shade guide gives recipe for
multiple shades
• Anatomic– highly chromatic dentin
matched to existing dentin– colorless enamel replaces
existing enamel
Click here for details
![Page 38: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Composite Selection
• Anterior/stress (Class 4)– hybrid
• mini- or midi-fill
– hybrid/microfill veneer combo
• Anterior/non-stress (Class 3 or 5)– hybrid
• mini-fill
– microfill
![Page 39: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Composite Selection
• Posterior– hybrid
• mini- or midi-fill
– reinforced microfill
![Page 40: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Selecting a Brand
• Contents of kit– shades– bonding agent– unit-dose compules vs syringes
• Indications– anterior, posterior, both?
• Cost of kit– refills
![Page 41: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Packable Composites
• Marketed for posterior use– increase in viscosity
• better proximal contacts? • handle like amalgam?
• Subtle alteration of filler– shape– size– particle distribution
• Similar resin chemistry and filler volume
Click here for table of packable composites
![Page 42: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Types
Packable
Flowable
![Page 43: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Packable Composites• Mechanical properties
– similar to hybrids
Choi J Esthet Dent 2000 Click here for abstract
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
ALERTSolitareSureFilHeliomolarZ100
Fracture Toughness
![Page 44: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Proximal Contact Studies
• Packables similar to hybrids– diameter and tightness
• Best contacts– sectional matrix system
Peumans Dent Mater 2001 -click here for abstract Klein Am J Dent 2002
![Page 45: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
96.9 96.291.2
85.1
71.5 70.370.2
55.4
41.4
22.4
0 00
20
40
60
80
100
Pyr-D Prodigy SureFil Alert Solitaire Pyr-E
2 mm
5 mm
Depth of Cure
Packable Composite Resin
% Hardness Ratio
Choi J Esthet Dent 2000 Click here for abstract
![Page 46: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Packable Vs. Hybrid Composites
• Mechanical properties similar
• Wear properties similar
• Curing depths similar
• Similar proximal contacts
• Drier, denser feel
Choi J Esthet Dent 2000Peumans Dent Mater 2001
Click here for more details
![Page 47: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Flowable Composites
• Marketed – class 1, 3, 5– liner
• Particle size similar to hybrid composites
• Reduced filler content– reduces viscosity
01020304050607080
We
igh
t P
erce
nt
Percent Filler Loading
Aeliteflo
FloRestore
Revolution
Ultraseal+
Prodigy
Bayne JADA 1998 Click here for abstract
![Page 48: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Liners Under Direct Composites
• Increased flow • Increased shrinkage• Improved marginal integrity?
– laboratory studies equivocal• most studies show no benefit
– Braga JADA 2003» click here for abstract
• Reduced post-operative sensitivity?– no clinical evidence of reduction
– Perdigao Quint Int 2004» click here for abstract
![Page 49: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Flowable Composites
• Clinical applications– preventive resin restorations– small Class 5– provisional repair– composite repair– liners??
![Page 50: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Regular Material Usage*Civilian Practitioners
• Flowable Composite 81%• Hybrid Composite 69%• Amalgam 67%• All-Purpose Composite 53%• Microfill Composite 52%• Resin-modified Glass ionomer 45%• Packable Composite 33%• Compomer 7%• Other 1%
DPR 2005*Multiple responses
![Page 51: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Review of Clinical Studies(Failure Rates in Posterior Permanent Teeth)
0
2
4
6
8
Amalgam DirectComp
CompInlays
CeramicInlays
CAD/CAMInlays
GoldInlays &Onlays
GI
Longitudinal Cross-Sectional
Hickel J Adhes Dent 2001
% Annual Failure
![Page 52: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
0
5
10
15
% Annual Failure
Manhart Oper Dent 2004 Click here for abstract
Standard Deviation
Longitudinal and Cross-Sectional Data
Review of Clinical Studies(Failure Rates in Posterior Permanent Teeth)
![Page 53: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Future Composites
• Low-shrinking monomers– expanding spiroorthocarbonates– epoxy-based resins– liquid crystal
• Self-adhesive?
![Page 54: Restorative Composite Resins](https://reader034.vdocuments.us/reader034/viewer/2022050905/54ffde654a79598f128b4c28/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Thank you