Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations 4/2009

01-12-2009 | Original Article

Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites

Authors: Nicoleta Ilie, Reinhard Hickel

Published in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Since a direct comparison of composites efficacy in clinical studies is very difficult, our study aimed to analyse in laboratory tests under standardised and simulated clinical conditions a large variety of commercial composite materials belonging to eight different materials categories. Thus, 72 hybrid, nano-hybrid, micro-filled, packable, ormocer-based and flowable composites, compomers and flowable compomers were compared in terms of their mechanical behaviour. Flexural strength (FS), flexural modulus (FM), diametric tensile (DTS) and compressive strength (CS) were measured after the samples had been stored in water for 24 h at 37°C. Results were statistically analysed using one-way ANOVA with Tukey HSD post hoc test (α = 0.05) as well as partial η 2 statistics. Large varieties between the tested materials within the same material category were found. The hybrid, nano-hybrid, packable and ormocer-based composites do not differ significantly among each other as a material type, reaching the highest FS values. Nano-hybrid composites are characterised by a good FS, the best DTS but a low FM. The lowest mechanical properties achieved the micro-filled hybrids. The flowable composites and compomers showed for all properties comparable result. Both flowable material categories do not differ significantly from the micro-filled composites for the most mechanical properties, showing only a higher DTS. The filler volume was shown to have the highest influence on the measured properties, inducing a maximum FS and FM at a level of 60%, whereas such dependence was not measured for DTS or CS. The influence of the type of material on the mechanical properties was significant but very low, showing the strongest influence on the CS.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Braga RR Ferracane JL (2004) Alternatives in polymerisation contraction stress management. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 15:176–184CrossRef Braga RR Ferracane JL (2004) Alternatives in polymerisation contraction stress management. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med 15:176–184CrossRef
2.
3.
go back to reference Rueggeberg FA (2002) From vulcanite to vinyl, a history of resins in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 87:364–379CrossRefPubMed Rueggeberg FA (2002) From vulcanite to vinyl, a history of resins in restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 87:364–379CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Weinmann W, Thalacker C Guggenberger R (2005) Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater 21:68–74CrossRefPubMed Weinmann W, Thalacker C Guggenberger R (2005) Siloranes in dental composites. Dent Mater 21:68–74CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Bayne SC, Heymann HO, Swift EL (1994) Update on dental composite restorations. I Am Dent Assoc 125:687–701 Bayne SC, Heymann HO, Swift EL (1994) Update on dental composite restorations. I Am Dent Assoc 125:687–701
6.
go back to reference Hickel R, Dasch W, Janda R, Tyas M, Anusavice K (1998) New direct restorative materials. FDI Commission Project. Int Dent J 48:3–16PubMed Hickel R, Dasch W, Janda R, Tyas M, Anusavice K (1998) New direct restorative materials. FDI Commission Project. Int Dent J 48:3–16PubMed
7.
go back to reference Lutz F, Phillips RW (1983) A classification and evaluation of composite resin systems. J Prosthet Dent 50:480–488CrossRefPubMed Lutz F, Phillips RW (1983) A classification and evaluation of composite resin systems. J Prosthet Dent 50:480–488CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Celis JP, Vanherle G (1992) A classification of dental composites according to their morphological and mechanical characteristics. Dent Mater 8:310–319CrossRefPubMed Willems G, Lambrechts P, Braem M, Celis JP, Vanherle G (1992) A classification of dental composites according to their morphological and mechanical characteristics. Dent Mater 8:310–319CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Epanechnikov VA (1969) Nonparametric estimation of a multivariate probability density. Theory Probab App 14:153–458CrossRef Epanechnikov VA (1969) Nonparametric estimation of a multivariate probability density. Theory Probab App 14:153–458CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Sarrett DC (2005) Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater 21:9–20CrossRefPubMed Sarrett DC (2005) Clinical challenges and the relevance of materials testing for posterior composite restorations. Dent Mater 21:9–20CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Brunthaler A, Konig F, Lucas T, Sperr W, Schedle A (2003) Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 7:63–70CrossRefPubMed Brunthaler A, Konig F, Lucas T, Sperr W, Schedle A (2003) Longevity of direct resin composite restorations in posterior teeth. Clin Oral Investig 7:63–70CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference van Dijken JW (2000) Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent 28:299–306CrossRefPubMed van Dijken JW (2000) Direct resin composite inlays/onlays: an 11 year follow-up. J Dent 28:299–306CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, D′Hoore W, Carvalho J, Qvist V (2003) Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent 31:395–405CrossRefPubMed Van Nieuwenhuysen JP, D′Hoore W, Carvalho J, Qvist V (2003) Long-term evaluation of extensive restorations in permanent teeth. J Dent 31:395–405CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Lambrechts P, Ameye C, Vanherle G (1982) Conventional and micro-filled composite resins. Part II. Chip fractures. J Prosthet Dent 48:527–538CrossRefPubMed Lambrechts P, Ameye C, Vanherle G (1982) Conventional and micro-filled composite resins. Part II. Chip fractures. J Prosthet Dent 48:527–538CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Leinfelder KF, McCartha CD, Wisniewski JF (1985) Posterior composite resins. A critical review. J Ala Dent Assoc 69:19–25PubMed Leinfelder KF, McCartha CD, Wisniewski JF (1985) Posterior composite resins. A critical review. J Ala Dent Assoc 69:19–25PubMed
16.
go back to reference Zantner C, Kielbassa AM, Martus P, Kunzelmann KH (2004) Sliding wear of 19 commercially available composites and compomers. Dent Mater 20:277–285CrossRefPubMed Zantner C, Kielbassa AM, Martus P, Kunzelmann KH (2004) Sliding wear of 19 commercially available composites and compomers. Dent Mater 20:277–285CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Ferracane JL (2006) Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices. Dent Mater 22:689–692CrossRefPubMed Ferracane JL (2006) Is the wear of dental composites still a clinical concern? Is there still a need for in vitro wear simulating devices. Dent Mater 22:689–692CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Curtis AR, Shortall AC, Marquis PM, Palin WM (2008) Water uptake and strength characteristics of a nano-filled resin-based composite. J Dent 36:186–193CrossRefPubMed Curtis AR, Shortall AC, Marquis PM, Palin WM (2008) Water uptake and strength characteristics of a nano-filled resin-based composite. J Dent 36:186–193CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R (2000) Mechanical properties and wear behaviour of light-cured packable composite resins. Dent Mater 16:33–40CrossRefPubMed Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Chen HY, Hickel R (2000) Mechanical properties and wear behaviour of light-cured packable composite resins. Dent Mater 16:33–40CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Choi KK, Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ, Charlton D (2000) Properties of packable dental composites. J Esthet Dent 12:216–226CrossRefPubMed Choi KK, Ferracane JL, Hilton TJ, Charlton D (2000) Properties of packable dental composites. J Esthet Dent 12:216–226CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Knobloch LA, Kerby RE, Seghi R, Berlin JS, Clelland N (2002) Fracture toughness of packable and conventional composite materials. J Prosthet Dent 88:307–313CrossRefPubMed Knobloch LA, Kerby RE, Seghi R, Berlin JS, Clelland N (2002) Fracture toughness of packable and conventional composite materials. J Prosthet Dent 88:307–313CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Klein F, Keller AK, Staehle HJ, Dorfer CE (2002) Proximal contact formation with different restorative materials and techniques. Am J Dent 15:232–235PubMed Klein F, Keller AK, Staehle HJ, Dorfer CE (2002) Proximal contact formation with different restorative materials and techniques. Am J Dent 15:232–235PubMed
23.
go back to reference Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Asscherickx K, Simon S, Abe Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (2001) Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts. Dent Mater 17:533–541CrossRefPubMed Peumans M, Van Meerbeek B, Asscherickx K, Simon S, Abe Y, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G (2001) Do condensable composites help to achieve better proximal contacts. Dent Mater 17:533–541CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Ernst CP, Buhtz C, Rissing C, Willershausen B (2002) Clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 2 years. Compend Contin Educ Dent 23:7117–7720 Ernst CP, Buhtz C, Rissing C, Willershausen B (2002) Clinical performance of resin composite restorations after 2 years. Compend Contin Educ Dent 23:7117–7720
25.
go back to reference Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B (2003) Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 7:129–134CrossRefPubMed Ernst CP, Canbek K, Aksogan K, Willershausen B (2003) Two-year clinical performance of a packable posterior composite with and without a flowable composite liner. Clin Oral Investig 7:129–134CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Lopes LG, Cefaly DF, Franco EB, Mondelli RF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF (2003) Clinical evaluation of two “packable” posterior composite resins: two-year results. Clin Oral Investig 7:123–128CrossRefPubMed Lopes LG, Cefaly DF, Franco EB, Mondelli RF, Lauris JR, Navarro MF (2003) Clinical evaluation of two “packable” posterior composite resins: two-year results. Clin Oral Investig 7:123–128CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Poon EC, Smales RJ, Yip KH (2005) Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: results at 3.5 years. J Am Dent Assoc 136:1533–1540PubMed Poon EC, Smales RJ, Yip KH (2005) Clinical evaluation of packable and conventional hybrid posterior resin-based composites: results at 3.5 years. J Am Dent Assoc 136:1533–1540PubMed
28.
go back to reference Wolter H, Storch W, Ott H (1994) New inorganic/organic copolymers (ORMOCER®S) for dental applications. Mat ResSoc Symp Proc 346:143–149 Wolter H, Storch W, Ott H (1994) New inorganic/organic copolymers (ORMOCER®S) for dental applications. Mat ResSoc Symp Proc 346:143–149
29.
go back to reference Tagtekin DA, Yanikoglu FC, Bozkurt FO, Kologlu B, Sur H (2004) Selected characteristics of an Ormocer and a conventional hybrid resin composite. Dent Mater 20:487–497CrossRefPubMed Tagtekin DA, Yanikoglu FC, Bozkurt FO, Kologlu B, Sur H (2004) Selected characteristics of an Ormocer and a conventional hybrid resin composite. Dent Mater 20:487–497CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Yap AU, Tan CH, Chung SM (2004) Wear behaviour of new composite restoratives. Oper Dent 29:269–274PubMed Yap AU, Tan CH, Chung SM (2004) Wear behaviour of new composite restoratives. Oper Dent 29:269–274PubMed
31.
go back to reference Cattani-Lorente M, Bouillaguet S, Godin CH, Meyer JM (2001) Polymerization shrinkage of Ormocer based dental restorative composites. Eur Cell Mater 1:25–26 Cattani-Lorente M, Bouillaguet S, Godin CH, Meyer JM (2001) Polymerization shrinkage of Ormocer based dental restorative composites. Eur Cell Mater 1:25–26
32.
go back to reference Moszner N, Gianasmidis A, Klapdohr S, Fischer UK, Rheinberger V (2008) Sol-gel materials 2. Light-curing dental composites based on ormocers of cross-linking alkoxysilane methacrylates and further nano-components. Dent Mater 24:851–856CrossRefPubMed Moszner N, Gianasmidis A, Klapdohr S, Fischer UK, Rheinberger V (2008) Sol-gel materials 2. Light-curing dental composites based on ormocers of cross-linking alkoxysilane methacrylates and further nano-components. Dent Mater 24:851–856CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference el Kalla IH, Garcia-Godoy F (2000) Compomers adaptation to class I and V cavities in permanent teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 67(8):29–36PubMed el Kalla IH, Garcia-Godoy F (2000) Compomers adaptation to class I and V cavities in permanent teeth. ASDC J Dent Child 67(8):29–36PubMed
34.
go back to reference Yap AU, Chung SM, Chow WS, Tsai KT, Lim CT (2004) Fracture resistance of compomer and composite restoratives. Oper Dent 29:29–34PubMed Yap AU, Chung SM, Chow WS, Tsai KT, Lim CT (2004) Fracture resistance of compomer and composite restoratives. Oper Dent 29:29–34PubMed
35.
go back to reference Ferracane JL, Antonio RC, Matsumoto H (1987) Variables affecting the fracture toughness of dental composites. J Dent Res 66:1140–1145PubMed Ferracane JL, Antonio RC, Matsumoto H (1987) Variables affecting the fracture toughness of dental composites. J Dent Res 66:1140–1145PubMed
36.
go back to reference Wucher M, Grobler SR, Senekal PJ (2002) A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations. Am J Dent 15:274–278PubMed Wucher M, Grobler SR, Senekal PJ (2002) A 3-year clinical evaluation of a compomer, a composite and a compomer/composite (sandwich) in class II restorations. Am J Dent 15:274–278PubMed
37.
go back to reference Roeters JJ, Frankenmolen F, Burgersdijk RC, Peters TC (1998) Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results. Am J Dent 11:143–148PubMed Roeters JJ, Frankenmolen F, Burgersdijk RC, Peters TC (1998) Clinical evaluation of Dyract in primary molars: 3-year results. Am J Dent 11:143–148PubMed
38.
go back to reference Benz C, Hickel R (2005) 4-year evaluation of a compomer in class II restorations. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 60:200–202 Benz C, Hickel R (2005) 4-year evaluation of a compomer in class II restorations. Dtsch Zahnärztl Z 60:200–202
39.
go back to reference Huth KC, Manhart J, Selbertinger A, Paschos E, Kaaden C, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (2004) 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth. Am J Dent 17:51–55PubMed Huth KC, Manhart J, Selbertinger A, Paschos E, Kaaden C, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (2004) 4-year clinical performance and survival analysis of Class I and II compomer restorations in permanent teeth. Am J Dent 17:51–55PubMed
40.
go back to reference Chen HY, Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (2003) Polymerization contraction stress in light-cured compomer restorative materials. Dent Mater 19:597–602CrossRefPubMed Chen HY, Manhart J, Kunzelmann KH, Hickel R (2003) Polymerization contraction stress in light-cured compomer restorative materials. Dent Mater 19:597–602CrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Htang A, Ohsawa M, Matsumoto H (1995) Fatigue resistance of composite restorations: effect of filler content. Dent Mater 11:7–13CrossRefPubMed Htang A, Ohsawa M, Matsumoto H (1995) Fatigue resistance of composite restorations: effect of filler content. Dent Mater 11:7–13CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Investigations on mechanical behaviour of dental composites
Authors
Nicoleta Ilie
Reinhard Hickel
Publication date
01-12-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Electronic ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-009-0258-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

Clinical Oral Investigations 4/2009 Go to the issue