Effect of resin matrix on degree of conversion and fracture toughness of dental composites

Yun-Shin Lee; Kyoung-Kyu Choi; Sang-Jin Park

doi:10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.1.077

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Restor Dent Endod > Volume 27(1); 2002 > Article

Original Article Effect of resin matrix on degree of conversion and fracture toughness of dental composites: Yun-Shin Lee, Kyoung-Kyu Choi, Sang-Jin Park; Journal of Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry 2002;27(1):77-86.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.1.077
Published online: January 31, 2002

Department of Conservative Dentistry, Graduate School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University, Korea.

14 Views
0 Download

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
REFERENCES

Abstract

Current composites are made with dimethacrylate monomers and silane-treated silica microfillers, either alone or with silane treated glass fillers. The main reasons for clinical failure of dental composites are secondary caries, wear and fracture. Most of practitioner want to get a composite which is more tougher under occlusal stress, less polymerization contraction, and better handling properties in application clinically. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of resin matrix with various flows on the physical properties such as fracture toughness and degree of conversion of the experimental resins. It was hypothesized that flexible or tough resin composites can be designed by judicious choice of monomer composition.

Various flow resin matrices containing Bis-GMA, UDMA, and TEG-DMA were made by altering the proportion of the monomers. After the unfilled resins were light-cured for different light intensity, the fracture toughness(K_1c) was measured according to ASTM standard using the single edge notched geometry, and degree of conversion(DC) was measured by FTIR. And experimental composites were formulated with variations in the proportion of silanated quartz and strontium glass fillers as 60, 75, and 77wt%. Also, the physical properties of composites with various filler contents were evaluated as same manner. All resulting data were compared by ANOVA/Tukeys test at 0.05 level.

The results were as follows;

1. The degree of conversion of high flow resin containing less Bis-GMA was higher than that of low flow unfilled resin.

2. While the degree of conversion of unfilled resin was increased according to light intensity for polymerization, there was no significant increase with moderate and high light intensity. Also, the fracture toughness was not increased by high light intensity.

3. The fracture toughness was high in the low flow unfilled resin containing higher contents of Bis-GMA.

4. There was a significant increase for fracture toughness and a tendency for degree of conversion to be reduced when the content of fillers was increased.

5. In the experimental composites, the flow of resin matrix did not affected on the fracture toughness, even, which was decreased as increase of viscosity.

These results showed that the physical properties of a dental composite could be attributed to the flow of resin matrix with relative content of monomers. Specific combination of resin monomers should be designed to fulfil the needs of specific indication for use.

REFERENCES

1. Full CA, Hollander WR. The composite resin restoration. A literature review part III. What the future holds. ASDC J Dent Child. 1993;60: 57-59.PubMed
2. Ferracane JL. Using posterior composites appropriately. J Am Dent Assoc. 1992;123: 53-58.
3. Phillips RW. Skinner's science of dental materials. 1973;7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Co..
4. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Mechanical properties of heat-treated restorative resin for use in the inlay/onlay technique. Scand J Dent Res. 1990;98: 564-567.PubMed
5. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. Influence of aldehydes on selected mechanical properties of resin composites. J Dent Res. 1992;71: 1522-1524.Article PubMed PDF
6. Peutzfeldt A, Asmussen E. In vitro wear, hardness and conversion of diacetyl-containing and propanal-containing resin materials. Dent Mater. 1996;12: 103-108.Article PubMed
7. Ruyter IE. In: Vanherle , Smith , editors. Monomer systems and polymerization. In posterior composites resin dental restorative materials. 1985;Utrecht, The Netherlands: P Szulo Publishing; 109-135.
8. Peutzfeldt A. Resin composites in dentistry: the monomer systems. Eur J Oral Sci. 1997;105: 97-116.Article PubMed
9. Kaye GWC, Laby TH. Tables of physical and chemical constants and some mathematical functions. 1959;12th edition. London: Longmans, Green & Co.; 37.
10. Asmussen E. Penetration of restorative resins into acid etched enamel (I). Acta Odontol Scand. 1977;35: 175-182.PubMed
11. Ruyter IE, Oysaed H. Composites for use in posterior teeth: Composition and conversion. J Biomed Mater Res. 1987;21: 11-23.Article PubMed PDF
12. Glenn JF. In: Smith DC, Williams DF, editors. Composition and properties of unfilled and composite resin restorative materials. Biocompatibility of dental materials. vol.III: Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Inc.; 98-130.
13. Indrani DJ, Cook WD, Televantos F, Tyas MJ, Harcourt JK. Fracture toughness of water- aged resin composite restorative materials. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 201-207.Article PubMed
14. Olea N, Pulgar R, Perez P, Pea-Serrano F, Rivas A, Novillo-Fertrell A, Pedraza V, Soto A, Sonnenschein C. Estrogenicity of resin-based composites and sealants used in dentistry. Environ Health Perspect. 1996;104: 298-305.Article PubMed PMC
15. Ruyter IE, Svendsen SA. Remaining methacrylate groups in composite restorative materials. Acta Odontol Scand. 1978;36: 75-82.Article PubMed
16. Ferracane JL. Elution of leachable components from composites. J Oral Rehabil. 1994;21: 441-452.Article PubMed
17. Ferracane JL, Greener EH. The effect of resin formulation on the degree of conversion and mechanical properties of dental restorative resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 1986;20: 121-131.Article PubMed
18. Asmussen E. Restorative resins: hardness and strength vs. quantity of remaining double bonds. Scand J Dent Res. 1982;90: 484-489.PubMed
19. Kelly JR. Perspectives on strength. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 103-110.Article PubMed
20. Beaumont PWR, Young RJ. Slow crack growth in acrylic bone cement. J Biomed Mater Res. 1975;9: 423-439.Article PubMed
21. Mecholsky JJ. Fracture mechanics principles. Dent Mater. 1995;11: 111-112.Article PubMed
22. Griffith AA. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil Trans Series A. 1920;221: 163-198.
23. Hertzberg RW. Deformation and fracture mechanics of engineering materials. 1989;New York: John Wiley and Sons; 274-283.
24. Tyas MJ. Correlation between fracture properties and clinical performance of composite resins in class IV cavities. Aust Dent J. 1990;35(1):46-49.Article PubMed
25. Mazer RB, Leinfelder KF, Russell CM. Degradation of microfilled posterior composite. Dent Mater. 1992;8(3):185-189.Article PubMed
26. Knibbs PJ, Smart ER. The clinical performance of a posterior composite resin restorative material. J Oral Rehabil. 1992;19(3):231-237.PubMed
27. Stangel I, Barolet RY. Clinical evaluation of two posterior composite resins. J Oral Rehabil. 1990;17(3):257-268.PubMed
28. ASTM Standard E 399-83. Standard test method for plane-strain fracture toughness of metallic materials. 1984 Annual book of ASTM standard. 1984;Philadelphia: ASTM; 592-622.
29. Ferracane JL, Antonio RC, Matsumoto H. Variables affecting the fracture toughness of dental composites. J Dent Res. 1987;66(6):1140-1145.Article PubMed PDF
30. Ferracane JL. In vitro evaluation of composite resins. Structure-property relationships. Trans Acad Dent Mater. 1989;2: 6-35.
31. Feilzer AJ, Dooren LH, De Gee AJ, Davidson CL. Influence of light intensity on polymerization shrinkage and integrity of restoration-cavity interface. Eur J Oral Sci. 1995;103: 322-326.Article PubMed
32. Asmussen E, Peutzfeldt A. Influence of UEDMA, Bis-GMA and TEGDMA on selected mechanical properties of experimental resin composites. Dent Mater. 1998;14(1):51-56.Article PubMed
33. Tarumi H, Imazato S, Ehara A, Kato S, Ebi N, Ebisu S. Post-irradiation polymerization of composites containing Bis-GMA and TEGDMA. Dent Mater. 1999;15(4):238-242.Article PubMed
34. Braem M, Ringer W, van Doren V, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Mechanical properties and filler fraction of dental composites. Dent Mater. 1989;5: 346-349.Article PubMed
35. Lloyd CH, Mitchell L. The fracture toughness of tooth coloured restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil. 1984;11: 257-272.Article PubMed
36. Kim KH, Park JH, Imai Y, Kishi T. Microfracture mechanisms of dental resin composites containing spherically-shaped filler particles. J Dent Res. 1994;73(2):499-504.Article PubMed PDF
37. Ferracane JL, Berge HX. Fracture toughness of experimental dental composites aged in ethanol. J Dent Res. 1995;74(7):1418-1423.Article PubMed PDF
38. Young RJ, Beaumont PWR. Failure of brittle polymers by slow crack growth. Part 2. Failure processes in a silica particle-filled epoxy resin composite. J Mater Sci. 1975;10: 1343-1350.Article PDF
39. Eliades GC, Vougiouklakis GJ, Caputo AA. Degree of double bond conversion in light-cured composites. Dent Mater. 1987;3: 19-25.PubMed
40. Yoshida K, Greener EH. Effects of two amine reducing agents on the degree of conversion and physical properties of an unfilled light-cured resin. Dent Mater. 1993;9(4):246-251.Article PubMed
41. Yoshida K, Greener EH. Effect of photoinitiator on degree of conversion of unfilled light-cured resin. J Dent. 1994;22(5):296-299.Article PubMed
42. Kawaguchi M, Fukushima T, Miyazaki K. The relationship between cure depth and transmission coefficient of visible-light-activated resin composites. J Dent Res. 1994;73(2):516-521.Article PubMed PDF
43. Beatty MW, Swartz ML, Moore BK, Phillips RW, Roberts TA. Effect of crosslinking agent content, monomer functionality, and repeat unit chemistry on properties of unfilled resins. J Biomed Mater Res. 1993;27(3):403-413.Article PubMed
44. Rueggeberg FA, Jordan DM. Effect of light- tip distance on polymerization of resin composite. Int J Prosthodont. 1993;6(4):364-367.PubMed
45. Lovell LG, Newman SM, Bowman CN. The effects of light intensity, temperature, and comonomer composition on the polymerization behavior of dimethacrylate dental resins. J Dent Res. 1999;78(8):1469-1476.Article PubMed PDF
46. Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ. Polymerization shrinkage and polymerization shrinkage stress in polymer-based restoratives. J Dent. 1997;25(6):435-440.Article PubMed
47. Choi KK, Condon JR, Ferracane JL. The effects of adhesive thickness on polymerization contraction stress of composite. J Dent Res. 2000;79(3):812-817.Article PubMed PDF
48. Davidson-Kaban SS, Davidson CL, Feilzer AJ, De Gee AJ, Erdilek N. The effect of curing light variations of bulk curing and wall-to-wall quality of two types and various shades of resin composites. Dent Mater. 1997;13: 344-352.PubMed
49. Sakaguchi RL, Berge HX. Reduced light energy density decreased post-gel contraction while maintaining degree of conversion in composites. J Dent. 1998;26: 695-700.PubMed
50. Silikas N, Watts DC. Rheology of urethane dimethacrylate and diluent formulations. Dent Mater. 1999;15(4):257-261.Article PubMed
51. St Germain H, Swartz ML, Phillips RW, Moore BK, Roberts TA. Properties of microfilled composite resins as influenced by filler content. J Dent Res. 1985;64: 155-160.Article PubMed PDF
52. Ferracane JL, Condon JR, Suh B. Effect of filler on degree of conversion(DC) of resins. J Dent Res (abstract). 1992;71: 598.
53. Asmussen E. Clinical relevance of physical, chemical, and bonding properties of composite resins. Oper Dent. 1985;10: 61-73.PubMed
54. Ferracane JL, Mitchem JC, Condon JR, Todd R. Wear and marginal breakdown of composites with various degrees of cure. J Dent Res. 1997;76(8):1508-1516.Article PubMed PDF
55. Jones DW, Rizkalla AS. Characterization of experimental composite biomaterials. J Biomed Mater Res. 1996;33: 89-100.Article PubMed

Fig. 1

Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix.

Fig. 2

Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with light intensity for polymerization.

Fig. 3

Fracture toughness of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Fig. 4

Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin.

Fig. 5

Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with light intensity for polymerization.

Fig. 6

Degree of conversion of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Table 1

The composition of the experimental resin and filler

Bis-GMA:2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloyloxy)phenyl] propane

UDMA:urethane dimethacrylate

TEGDMA:triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

CQ:camphoroquinone, initiator

DMAEDA:2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate, accelerator

BHT:butylated hydroxytoluene, inhibitor

Table 2

Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 3

Fracture toughness of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Table 4

Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 5

Degree of conversion of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents

Tables & Figures

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

Effect of resin matrix on degree of conversion and fracture toughness of dental composites

J Korean Acad Conserv Dent. 2002;27(1):77-86. Published online January 31, 2002

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2002.27.1.077

XML Download

Figure

Related articles

Effects of CTHRC1 on odontogenic differentiation and angiogenesis in human dental pulp stem cells

Effect of resin matrix on degree of conversion and fracture toughness of dental composites

Fig. 1 Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix.

Fig. 2 Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with light intensity for polymerization.

Fig. 3 Fracture toughness of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Fig. 4 Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin.

Fig. 5 Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with light intensity for polymerization.

Fig. 6 Degree of conversion of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Effect of resin matrix on degree of conversion and fracture toughness of dental composites

Table 1

The composition of the experimental resin and filler

Bis-GMA:2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloyloxy)phenyl] propane

UDMA:urethane dimethacrylate

TEGDMA:triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

CQ:camphoroquinone, initiator

DMAEDA:2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate, accelerator

BHT:butylated hydroxytoluene, inhibitor

Table 2

Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 3

Fracture toughness of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Table 4

Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 5

Degree of conversion of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents

Table 1 The composition of the experimental resin and filler

Bis-GMA:2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacryloyloxy)phenyl] propane

UDMA:urethane dimethacrylate

TEGDMA:triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate

CQ:camphoroquinone, initiator

DMAEDA:2-(dimethylamino)ethyl methacrylate, accelerator

BHT:butylated hydroxytoluene, inhibitor

Table 2 Fracture toughness of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 3 Fracture toughness of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents.

Table 4 Degree of conversion of unfilled resins varied with flow of resin matrix and light intensity for polymerization.

Table 5 Degree of conversion of composite resins varied with flow of resin matrix and filler contents