Rezin İçerikli Restoratif Materyallerin Yüzey Pürüzlülüğünün, Su Emilimi ve Suda Çözünürlüklerinin İn Vitro Olarak İncelenmesi

Year 2023, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 1 - 8, 24.02.2023

Ahsen Mirdas , Ayşe Dündar , Çağatay Barutçugil

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı rezin materyallerin yüzey pürüzlülüğünü, su emilimini ve suda çözünürlüklerini incelemektir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmada kullanılan materyaller Filtek Bulk Fill Posterior, Charisma Smart, Gradia Plus İndirekt ve RIVA rezin modifiye cam iyonomer simandır (RMCİS). Her materyalden 20 adet olmak üzere 4mm çap ve 4 mm kalınlıkta 80 adet örnek hazırlandı. Çözünürlük ve su emilimi değerlerini saptamak için örneklerin başlangıç ağırlıkları hassas terazi kullanılarak ölçüldü (M1). Başlangıç yüzey pürüzlülük ölçümleri profilometre cihazı (Surftest SJ-201, Mitutoyo) ile yapıldı. Örnekler 2 farklı solüsyonda (Distile su, sitrik asit) 40 gün bekletildi, ardından örneklerin ağırlıkları tekrar ölçüldü (M2). Profilometre ile ikinci yüzey pürüzlülük değerleri belirlendi. Örnekler desikatörde bekletilip ağırlık sabitlendiğinde değerler M3 olarak kaydedildi. Çözünürlük ve su emilim düzeyleri ISO 4049:2009 standartlarına göre hesaplandı. Veriler tek yönlü ANOVA ve Tukey HSD çoklu karşılaştırmaları kullanılarak yapılmıştır (p=0,05).
Bulgular: Yüzey pürüzlülük değişimi ve su emilim değerleri karşılaştırıldığında RMCİS grupları kompozit gruplarına göre daha yüksek yüzey pürüzlülüğü ve su emilimi değerleri göstermiştir (p<0,05). Gruplar arasında suda çözünürlük açısından anlamlı farklılıklar olduğu bulunmuştur. (p<0,05) Charisma-SA grubu ile Gradia-SA grubu arasında ve Charisma-DS grubu ile diğer gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur (p<0.05). RMCİS’in sitrik asit içerisinde bekletilen örnekleri en yüksek suda çözünürlük değeri göstermiştir ve bu çözünürlük değeri tüm gruplardan istatistiksel olarak farklı bulunmuştur.
Sonuç: Bekletme ortamı, çalışmamızda test edilen gruplar arasında sadece cam iyonomer siman grubunda yüzey pürüzlülüğü, su emilimi ve çözünürlük açısından anlamlı bir artışa sebep olmuştur. En fazla su emilimi, çözünürlük ve yüzey pürüzlülüğü değişimi RMCİS sitrik asit grubunda görülmüştür. Bekletme ortamı kompozit rezin grupları arasında su emilimi ve yüzey pürüzlülüğü değişimi açısından herhangi bir fark yaratmamıştır. Kompozit grupları arasında bekleme ortamı kompozitlerin çözünürlüğünde anlamlı bir farka sebep olmamıştır.

Keywords

Suda çözünürlük, su emilimi, yüzey pürüzlülüğü, sitrik asit, kompozit rezin, cam iyonomer siman

Thanks

Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Fen Fakültesi Kimya Bölümü'nden Doç. Dr. Ömer Kesmez'e katkılarından dolayı teşekkür ederiz.

References

• 1. Geurtsen W, Schoeler U. A 4-year retrospective clinical study of Class I and Class II composite restorations. Journal of Dentistry. 1997;25(3-4):229-32.
• 2. Sarrett DC. Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dental materials. 2005;21(1):9-20.
• 3. Mormann W. Composite inlays: a research model with practice potential? Die Quintessenz. 1982;33(10):1891-901.
• 4. Burgoyne AR, Nicholls JI, Brudvik JS. In vitro two-body wear of inlay-onlay composite resin restoratives. The Journal of prosthetic dentistry. 1991;65(2):206-14.
• 5. Söderholm K-J, Zigan M, Ragan M, Fischlschweiger W, Bergman M. Hydrolytic degradation of dental composites. Journal of Dental Research. 1984;63(10):1248-54.
• 6. Øysæd H, Ruyter IE. Composites for use in posterior teeth: mechanical properties tested under dry and wet conditions. Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. 1986;20(2):261-71.
• 7. LARSEN IB, MUNKSGAARD EG. Effect of human saliva on surface degradation of composite resins. European Journal of Oral Sciences. 1991;99(3):254-61.
• 8. Heintze S, Zappini G, Rousson V. Wear of ten dental restorative materials in five wear simulators—results of a round robin test. Dental Materials. 2005;21(4):304-17.
• 9. Petterson D, Grecz N, Durgan E. FDA Guidelines for Chemistry and Tech-nology Requirements of Indirect Food Ad. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1976:1195.
• 10. Garcia FCP, Wang L, D'Alpino PHP, Souza JBd, Araújo PAd, Mondelli RFdL. Evaluation of the roughness and mass loss of the flowable composites after simulated toothbrushing abrasion. Brazilian oral research. 2004;18:156-61.
• 11. Yap A, Lim L, Yang T, Ali A, Chung S. Influence of dietary solvents on strength of nanofill and ormocer composites. Oper Dent. 2005;30(1):129-33.
• 12. Small I, Watson T, Chadwick AV, Sidhu S. Water sorption in resin-modified glass-ionomer cements: an in vitro comparison with other materials. Biomaterials. 1998;19(6):545-50.
• 13. Kalachandra S, Wilson T. Water sorption and mechanical properties of light-cured proprietary composite tooth restorative materials. Biomaterials. 1992;13(2):105-9.
• 14. ISO E. 4049 Dentistry-Polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland. 1988.
• 15. Lewis RJ. Food additives handbook: Springer Science & Business Media; 1989.
• 16. Rahim TNAT, Mohamad D, Akil HM, Ab Rahman I. Water sorption characteristics of restorative dental composites immersed in acidic drinks. Dental Materials. 2012;28(6):e63-e70.
• 17. Alifen GK, Soetojo A, Saraswati W. Differences in surface roughness of nanohybrid composites immersed in varying concentrations of citric acid. Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi). 2017;50(2):102-5.
• 18. Kooi T, Tan Q, Yap A, Guo W, Tay K, Soh M. Effects of food-simulating liquids on surface properties of giomer restoratives. Operative Dentistry. 2012;37(6):665-71.
• 19. Dündar A, Şengün A, Başlak C, Kuş M. Effects of citric acid modified with fluoride, nano-hydroxyapatite and casein on eroded enamel. Archives of Oral Biology. 2018;93:177-86.
• 20. Almeida GS, Poskus LT, Guimarães JGA, Silva EM. The effect of mouthrinses on salivary sorption, solubility and surface degradation of a nanofilled and a hybrid resin composite. Operative dentistry. 2010;35(1):105-11.
• 21. Albuquerque PPA, Moreira AD, Moraes RR, Cavalcante LM, Schneider LFJ. Color stability, conversion, water sorption and solubility of dental composites formulated with different photoinitiator systems. Journal of dentistry. 2013;41:e67-e72.
• 22. Örtengren U, Wellendorf H, Karlsson S, Ruyter I. Water sorption and solubility of dental composites and identification of monomers released in an aqueous environment. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2001;28(12):1106-15.
• 23. Alshali RZ, Salim NA, Satterthwaite JD, Silikas N. Long-term sorption and solubility of bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites in water and artificial saliva. Journal of dentistry. 2015;43(12):1511-8.
• 24. Abdallah AM, Mehesen R. Effect of Food Simulating Solutions on Surface Roughness of Four Restorative Materials. Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science. 2022;25(1):23-9.
• 25. Reddy DSR, Kumar RA, Venkatesan SM, Narayan GS, Duraivel D, Indra R. Influence of citric acid on the surface texture of glass ionomer restorative materials. Journal of conservative dentistry: JCD. 2014;17(5):436.
• 26. Tanthanuch S, Kukiattrakoon B, Eiam‐O‐Pas K, Pokawattana K, Pamanee N, Thongkamkaew W, et al. Surface changes of various bulk‐fill resin‐based composites after exposure to different food‐simulating liquid and beverages. Journal of Esthetic and Restorative Dentistry. 2018;30(2):126-35.
• 27. ISO-Standards. ISO 4049 Dentistry-polymer-based filling, restorative and luting materials. Geneve: International Organization for Standardization. 2000:1-27.
• 28. Yap AU, Han VT, Soh M, Siow K. Elution of leachable components from composites after LED and halogen light irradiation. OPERATIVE DENTISTRY-UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON-. 2004;29(4):448-53.
• 29. Venz S, Dickens B. NIR‐spectroscopic investigation of water sorption characteristics of dental resins and composites. Journal of biomedical materials research. 1991;25(10):1231-48.
• 30. Sideridou I, Tserki V, Papanastasiou G. Study of water sorption, solubility and modulus of elasticity of light-cured dimethacrylate-based dental resins. Biomaterials. 2003;24(4):655-65.
• 31. Yap A, Lee C. Water sorption and solubility of resin‐modified polyalkenoate cements. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 1997;24(4):310-4.
• 32. Yap AU. Resin-modified glass ionomer cements: a comparison of water sorption characteristics. Biomaterials. 1996;17(19):1897-900.
• 33. Wongkhantee S, Patanapiradej V, Maneenut C, Tantbirojn D. Effect of acidic food and drinks on surface hardness of enamel, dentine, and tooth-coloured filling materials. Journal of dentistry. 2006;34(3):214-20.
• 34. Bolan M, Ferreira M, Vieira R. Erosive effects of acidic center-filled chewing gum on primary and permanent enamel. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2008;26(4):149.
• 35. Valinoti AC, Neves BG, Silva EMd, Maia LC. Surface degradation of composite resins by acidic medicines and pH-cycling. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2008;16(4):257-65.
• 36. Göpferich A. Mechanisms of polymer degradation and erosion. The biomaterials: silver jubilee compendium. 1996:117-28.
• 37. Ferracane J. Elution of leachable components from composites. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 1994;21(4):441-52.
• 38. Tanaka K, Taira M, Shintani H, Wakasa K, Yamaki M. Residual monomers (TEGDMA and Bis‐GMA) of a set visible‐light‐cured dental composite resin when immersed in water. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 1991;18(4):353-62.
• 39. Eisenburger M, Addy M, Rossbach A. Acidic solubility of luting cements. Journal of dentistry. 2003;31(2):137-42.
• 40. Fukazawa M, Matsuya S, Yamane M. Mechanism for erosion of glass-ionomer cements in an acidic buffer solution. Journal of dental research. 1987;66(12):1770-4.
• 41. Lopes LG, Jardim Filho AdV, Souza JBd, Rabelo D, Franco EB, Freitas GCd. Influence of pulse-delay curing on sorption and solubility of a composite resin. Journal of Applied Oral Science. 2009;17(1):27-31.
• 42. Wei Y-j, Silikas N, Zhang Z-t, Watts DC. Diffusion and concurrent solubility of self-adhering and new resin–matrix composites during water sorption/desorption cycles. Dental Materials. 2011;27(2):197-205.
• 43. Malacarne J, Carvalho RM, Mario F, Svizero N, Pashley DH, Tay FR, et al. Water sorption/solubility of dental adhesive resins. Dental materials. 2006;22(10):973-80.
• 44. Cazzaniga G, Ottobelli M, Ionescu A, Garcia-Godoy F, Brambilla E. Surface properties of resin-based composite materials and biofilm formation: A review of the current literature. Am J Dent. 2015;28(6):311-20.
• 45. Bollenl CM, Lambrechts P, Quirynen M. Comparison of surface roughness of oral hard materials to the threshold surface roughness for bacterial plaque retention: a review of the literature. Dental materials. 1997;13(4):258-69.
• 46. Jones C, Billington R, Pearson G. The in vivo perception of roughness of restorations. British dental journal. 2004;196(1):42-5.
• 47. Torabzadeh H, Ghasemi A, Shakeri S, Baghban AA, Razmavar S. Effect of powder/liquid ratio of glass ionomer cements on flexural and shear bond strengths to dentin. Brazilian Journal of Oral Sciences. 2011;10(3):204-7.
• 48. Nicholson J, Gjorgievska E, Bajraktarova B, McKenzie M. Changes in properties of polyacid‐modified composite resins (compomers) following storage in acidic solutions. Journal of oral rehabilitation. 2003;30(6):601-7.
• 49. Bagheri R, Burrow M, Tyas M. Influence of food-simulating solutions and surface finish on susceptibility to staining of aesthetic restorative materials. Journal of dentistry. 2005;33(5):389-98.
• 50. Wa C. Influence of oral fluid on composite resin and glass-ionomer cement. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry. 1984;52(2):182-9.
• 51. Hellwig E, Lussi A. Oral hygiene products and acidic medicines. Dental erosion. 20: Karger Publishers; 2006. p. 112-8.
• 52. BİLGİLİ D, Barutçugil Ç, Dündar A. Besinleri Ve Ağız Ortamını Taklit Eden Sıvıların Restoratif Materyallerin Yüzey Pürüzlülüğüne Etkisi. Anatolian Clinic the Journal of Medical Sciences.26(1):98-107.
• 53. Yap A, Tan D, Goh B, Kuah H, Goh M. Effects of food-simulating liquids on the flexural strength of composite and polyacid-modified composite restoratives. Operative Dentistry. 2000;25(3):202-8.