Journal of Conservative Dentistry
Home About us Editorial Board Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact e-Alerts Login 
Users Online: 1155
Print this page  Email this page Bookmark this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 


 
Table of Contents   
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE  
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 21  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 302-305
Comparative evaluation of wear resistance of cast gold with bulk-fill composites an in vitro study


Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rajas Dental College and Hospital, The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission27-Jun-2017
Date of Decision15-Nov-2017
Date of Acceptance01-Mar-2018
Date of Web Publication22-May-2018
 

   Abstract 

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the wear resistance of cast gold with condensable bulk fill and a fiber reinforced bulk-fill composite.
Materials and Methods: The 5 mm × 4 mm stainless steel molds were prepared for wear resistance. Forty-five samples were divided into three groups (n = 15). The samples were restored as follows: Group I: cast gold alloy (d. SIGN 98; Ivoclar Vivadent), Group II: fiber reinforced composite (Ever X Posterio; r GC Corp.), and Group III: condensable bulk-fill composite (Tetric N Ceram; Ivoclar Vivadent). A pin on disc wear tester was used to measure the wear resistance. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance.
Results: Higher statistically significant values were seen for the cast gold restorations than the other two bulk-fill composites.
Conclusion: It is desirable for any restorative material to yield wear behavior. D. SIGN 98 (Type IV cast gold alloy) was the most wear resistant material tested, whereas Tetric N Ceram (condensable bulk-fill composite) was the least wear resistant.

Keywords: Bulk-fill composite; cast gold; Tetric N Ceram; wear resistance

How to cite this article:
Kumar A, Sarthaj A S, Majumder DS. Comparative evaluation of wear resistance of cast gold with bulk-fill composites an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent 2018;21:302-5

How to cite this URL:
Kumar A, Sarthaj A S, Majumder DS. Comparative evaluation of wear resistance of cast gold with bulk-fill composites an in vitro study. J Conserv Dent [serial online] 2018 [cited 2019 Oct 22];21:302-5. Available from: http://www.jcd.org.in/text.asp?2018/21/3/302/232924

   Introduction Top


We, in dentistry, still have choices to make. Esthetic dentistry has become a major focus in recent years, and it is difficult to know if this interest is generated by the patients or by the dentists. Resin-based composites have been introduced five decades ago and since then, they have gained popularity as a restorative material of choice, mainly due to its excellent esthetic properties.[1],[2] They also have replaced amalgam and gold as a posterior restorative material. Although a variety of composites including conventional, microfilled, hybrid, flowable, packable, nanofilled have been introduced, the main disadvantage of the resin-based composites is its polymerization shrinkage which exerts forces on the adhesive interfaces of the dentin.[3],[4] Furthermore, due to the insufficient depth of cure [5] of resin-based composites, incremental placement technique with a maximum 2 mm thickness was used. However, the use of dental composites in an incremental placement technique and light curing each increment individually is time-consuming for the patient and the operator.[6]

Recently, a new class of resin-based composite, the so-called “bulk-fill” composites have been introduced into the dental market with the purpose of time and thus cost savings.[7] The unique advantage of this material class is stated that it can be placed in a 4 mm thickness bulks to be used in one step instead of the current incremental placement technique, without adverse effect on polymerization shrinkage and cavity adaptation.

Earlier, gold was considered to be the esthetic restorative for posterior teeth as it does not discolor the teeth and the color gold was considered less objectionable than other materials. As we have become more aware of esthetics in dentistry, we also have developed new techniques even with gold which do not destroy the beauty of a smile. There is a renewed emphasis on intracanal gold restorations, which can be placed by showing no metal or in some cases, very little metal, by the proper design of cavity preparations.

Despite the improvement in wear resistance of restorative materials, wear continues to be a problem. Gradual wear of the teeth is a natural process. The rate of wear depends on individual factors such as the abrasiveness of the diet, oral habits such as bruxism or grinding. Wear resistance is one of the most difficult properties to evaluate in material sciences. One of the most common reasons for the failure of posterior composites is occlusal and proximal wear. High wear resistance leads to an increased lifetime of the restoration, color stability, and function. Conversely, low wear resistance may lead to tooth migration, TMJ tenderness, and periodontal diseases.


   Materials And Methods Top


The materials used in the study are summarized in [Table 1].
Table 1: Materials, manufacturers, and chemical composition used in the test

Click here to view


Specimen preparation

A stainless steel mold of 10 mm diameter and 4 mm thickness was fabricated. The cast gold fillets were melted over an oxygen blow torch and poured over the stainless steel mold. Fifteen such samples were prepared.

To prepare samples using bulk-fill composites, a mylar strip was placed over a glass slab, and the stainless steel mold was placed over it. The bulk-fill composite material was packed in bulk inside the mold until it was slightly overfilled. A second mylar strip was placed over the composite resin, and a glass slide was slightly compressed to extrude excess material. The flash is removed, and photoactivation was performed by positioning the light tip in contact with the specimen. Each specimen was irradiated according to the manufacturer's instructions for 10 s with a blue phase C8 light-curing unit (Bluephase C8 (G2)– Curing Light (100–240V), Ivoclar Vivadent, Schann, Liechtenstein). Specimens were retrieved from the mold and stored in deionized water at 37°C for 24 h. They were then grouped as follows.

  • Group I: Cast gold alloy (d. Sign 98)
  • Group II: Fiber reinforced composite (Ever X Posterior)
  • Group III: Nanohybrid resin composite (Tetric N-Ceram).


Wear testing

The wear testing was performed using Pin-On-Disc Wear Tester (ASTM G99, Magnum Engineers, Karnataka, India) as shown in [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Schematic diagram of Pin-On-Disc Wear Tester

Click here to view


Wear tests were conducted on a pin-on-disc wear tester as per ASTM G-99 standard). Sliding was performed under room conditions (temperature 23°C, relative humidity 50% ± 5%) over a period of 2 min at a sliding velocity of 50 m/s. The surface of one of the faces of the 10 mm × 4 mm specimen came in contact with a hardened alloy steel disc with a hardness value of 62 hC and surface roughness (Ra) of 0.54 μm. The contact schematic diagram of the counter-surface and the sample is shown in [Figure 1]. Before testing, the test samples were polished against a 600 grade SiC paper to ensure proper contact with the counterface. The surfaces of both the samples and the disc were cleaned with a soft paper soaked in acetone and thoroughly dried before testing. The pin assembly was initially weighed to an accuracy of 0.0001 g. The difference between the initial and final weights was the measure of sliding wear loss. Fifteen samples were run for each group. The wear was measured by the loss in weight, which was then converted into wear volume using the measured density data.

The specific wear rate (Ks) is calculated using Equation (1):



Where: ΔV is the volume loss, in m3, L is the load, in N, and d is the abrading distance, in m.

Statistical analysis

The data obtained from the study was manually entered into a Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) database (IBM, SPSS version 20, IL, USA) and analyzed with a significance level established at P < 0.05. Mean and standard deviation (SD) of weight loss for each test material were calculated and analyzed using one-way analysis of variance. Post hoc tests were performed for multiple comparisons and independent samples.


   Results Top


The mean weight loss of each test material and SD is given in [Table 2].
Table 2: The mean weight loss of each test material and SD

Click here to view


The highest mean weight loss was observed for Tetric N-Ceram (1.39) followed by Ever X Posterior (1.29). Cast gold had the lowest wear resistance (0.405). The graphical representation clearly depicts the same in [Figure 2].
Figure 2: Graphical representation of mean and standard deviation values of wear resistance (SD: standard deviation)

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


Wear is normally a slow process.[8],[9] The clinical manifestation of attrition shows the appearance of a flat circumscribed facet on the restorative material. As the wear progresses, there is a tendency toward reduction of the cusp height and the flattening of the occlusal incined planes which may ultimately lead to loss of vertical dimension.[8] A well-distributed occlusion has an important effect on the wear process.[10] Gold alloy restorations have a long history of satisfactory clinical performance and are said to be kind [11] to opposing tooth substance and restorative materials, wearing at approximately the same rate as enamel.[12],[13],[14]

Resin-based composites show higher wear rates when placed as large posterior restorations. However, with higher filler content, they show the lesser wear of opposing tooth substance. Thus, wear of composites is known to depend on filler particle-related features, particularly on the concentration and size of the filler reinforcement [15] and resin formulation.[16] Finer particles for a fixed-volume-fraction of filler have been documented to result in decreased interparticle spacing and thereby reducing wear.[17],[18] In terms of filler content, some in vitro wear studies have revealed that increased loading may enhance the wear resistance of dental composites.[19],[20] As for the resin formulation, the study has shown that increasing resin viscosity generally lowers the wear resistance.[21]

Bulk-fill restorative resins are not a new idea. The concept has been in the mind of practitioners and manufacturers for many years, and numerous bulk-fill products have come and gone from the market. Recently, numerous bulk-fill resin-based composites introduced have been introduced.[22] The main advantages of bulk-fill composites are that they present fewer number of voids, since all of it is placed at one time, the technique would be faster than placing numerous increments if curing times were identical and most of all they may be easier than placing numerous increments. Moreover also, due to the higher filler content of bulk-fill composites, greater will be the depth of cure, reduced volume of resin matrix for polymerization and intrinsically increased hardness.[23]

The enhancement of material properties in fiber reinforced bulk-fill composites was explained due to the stress transfer from the matrix to the fibers and also due to the action of the fibers in stopping crack propagation through the material.[24] It was found that the mere insertion of fibers is not only responsible for the enhanced wear resistance but also the length of the fibers and diameter play a critical role in this mechanism. The E glass fibers incorporated in the Ever X Posterior bulk-fill composite have a length (1–2 μm) that exceeds a certain minimum length (0.6–0.8 μm). This is known as the critical fiber length.[25]

The largest particles of the inorganic fillers of Tetric N-Ceram Bulk-fill measure 3 μm. The composite fillers have a maximum size of 50 μm. In the polymerized state, they behave like the smaller inorganic primary particles.[26] The larger filler particles do not protrude from the surface. The fine primary particles of the fillers are responsible for the composite's wear resistance and its excellent polishing properties, which are manifested in smooth surface texture and high luster.

The present results were obtained in optimized laboratory settings. However, clinical conditions are not similar, and the aspects such as insertion and handling could have a potential effect on the mechanical properties of the materials and their performance in vivo. Further investigations should be conducted to test other material properties. To acknowledge the results obtained with the present study, this should be followed by long-term clinical studies to assure the materials performance under normal clinical conditions.


   Conclusion Top


In the current study, cast gold has superior wear resistance than compared to the other two tested materials going by the proverbs “the old that is strong does not wither, and The deep roots are not reached by the frost.”

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
Roberson TM, Heymann HO, Ritter AV. Introduction to Composite Restorations. Sturdevant's Art and Science of Operative Dentistry. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2006. p. 495-526.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Mozner N, Salz U. New developments of polymeric dental composites. Prog Polym Sci 2001;26:535-76.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Moraes RR, Garcia JW, Barros MD, Lewis SH, Pfeifer CS, Liu J, et al. Control of polymerization shrinkage and stress in nanogel-modified monomer and composite materials. Dent Mater 2011;27:509-19.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
Eick JD, Welch FH. Polymerization shrinkage of posterior composite resins and its possible influence on postoperative sensitivity. Quintessence Int 1986;17:103-11.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.
Sakaguchi RL, Douglas WH, Peters MC. Curing light performance and polymerization of composite restorative materials. J Dent 1992;20:183-8.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.
Versluis A, Douglas WH, Cross M, Sakaguchi RL. Does an incremental filling technique reduce polymerization shrinkage stresses? J Dent Res 1996;75:871-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.
Göhring TN, Besek MJ, Schmidlin PR. Attritional wear and abrasive surface alterations of composite resin materials in vitro. J Dent 2002;30:119-27.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Mehta SB, Banerji S, Millar BJ, Suarez-Feito JM. Current concepts on the management of tooth wear: Part 1. Assessment, treatment planning and strategies for the prevention and the passive management of tooth wear. Br Dent J 2012;212:17-27.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]    
9.
Bartlett DW. Retrospective long term monitoring of tooth wear using study models. Br Dent J 2003;194:211-3.  Back to cited text no. 9
[PUBMED]    
10.
Oh WS, Delong R, Anusavice KJ. Factors affecting enamel and ceramic wear: A literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2002;87:451-9.  Back to cited text no. 10
[PUBMED]    
11.
Hickel R, Manhart J. Longevity of restorations in posterior teeth and reasons for failure. J Adhes Dent 2001;3:45-64.  Back to cited text no. 11
[PUBMED]    
12.
Ramp MH, Suzuki S, Cox CF, Lacefield WR, Koth DL. Evaluation of wear: Enamel opposing three ceramic materials and a gold alloy. J Prosthet Dent 1997;77:523-30.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]    
13.
Ekfeldt A, Oilo G. Wear of prosthodontic materials – an in vivo study. J Oral Rehabil 1990;17:117-29.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]    
14.
Graf K, Johnson GH, Mehl A, Rammelsberg P. The influence of dental alloys on three-body wear of human enamel and dentin in an inlay-like situation. Oper Dent 2002;27:167-74.  Back to cited text no. 14
[PUBMED]    
15.
Turssi CP, De Moraes Purquerio B, Serra MC. Wear of dental resin composites: Insights into underlying processes and assessment methods – A review. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2003;65:280-5.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]    
16.
Lambrechts P, Braem M, Vuylsteke-Wauters M, Vanherle G. Quantitative in vivo wear of human enamel. J Dent Res 1989;68:1752-4.  Back to cited text no. 16
[PUBMED]    
17.
Söderholm KJ, Richards ND. Wear resistance of composites: A solved problem? Gen Dent 1998;46:256-63.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Turssi CP, Ferracane JL, Vogel K. Filler features and their effects on wear and degree of conversion of particulate dental resin composites. Biomaterials 2005;26:4932-7  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Condon JR, Ferracane JL. In vitro wear of composite with varied cure, filler level, and filler treatment. J Dent Res 1997;76:1405-11.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]    
20.
Lim BS, Ferracane JL, Condon JR, Adey JD. Effect of filler fraction and filler surface treatment on wear of microfilled composites. Dent Mater 2002;18:1-11.  Back to cited text no. 20
[PUBMED]    
21.
Musanje L, Ferracane JL, Ferracane LL. Effects of resin formulation and nanofiller surface treatment on in vitro wear of experimental hybrid resin composite. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2006;77:120-5.  Back to cited text no. 21
[PUBMED]    
22.
Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, Nixon P. Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: A review. Br Dent J 2017;222:337-44.  Back to cited text no. 22
[PUBMED]    
23.
Garcia D, Yaman P, Dennison J, Neiva G. Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of bulk fill flowable composite resins. Oper Dent 2014;39:441-8.  Back to cited text no. 23
[PUBMED]    
24.
Garoushi S, Vallittu PK, Lassila LV. Short glass fiber reinforced restorative composite resin with semi-inter penetrating polymer network matrix. Dent Mater 2007;23:1356-62.  Back to cited text no. 24
[PUBMED]    
25.
Abouelleil H, Pradelle N, Villat C, Attik N, Colon P, Grosgogeat B, et al. Comparison of mechanical properties of a new fiber reinforced composite and bulk filling composites. Restor Dent Endod 2015;40:262-70.s  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Zhang H, Zhang ML, Qiu LH, Yu JT, Zhan FL. Comparison of wear resistance and flexural strength of three kinds of bulk-fill composite resins. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 2016;25:292-5.  Back to cited text no. 26
[PUBMED]    

Top
Correspondence Address:
Dr. A Sheerin Sarthaj
Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Rajas Dental College and Hospital, The Tamil Nadu Dr. MGR Medical University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JCD.JCD_196_17

Rights and Permissions


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
 
  Search
 
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  
 


    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials And Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed695    
    Printed8    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded112    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal