Search

Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-25T10:28:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2021-04-01 Background: This study aimed to evaluate surface treatments, adhesives and composites for repairing silorane based restorations. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty truncated cones (2 mm smaller diameter and 4 mm larger diameter) made of silorane composite were divided in 12 groups according with the surface treatment (diamond bur and oxide aluminum abrasion), the adhesive (Adper Scothbond Multipurpose (3M ESPE), Ecusit (Voco) and Filtek P90 Adhesive (3M ESPE)). Each group was subdivided in two according with the composite used for repair (methacrylate and silorane). The repair was made with a second truncated cone build over the first one and bond strength assssed by tensile strength. Data were submitted to ANOVA 3-way and Tukey’s test (p

Background. One of the problems with composite resin restorations is gap formation at resin‒tooth interface. The present study evaluated the effect of preheating cycles of silorane- and dimethacrylate-based composite resins on gap formation at the gingival margins of Class V restorations. Methods. In this in vitro study, standard Class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surfaces of 48 bovine incisors. For restorative procedure, the samples were randomly divided into 2 groups based on the type of composite resin (group 1: di-methacrylate composite [Filtek Z250]; group 2: silorane composite [Filtek P90]) and each group was randomly divided into 2 subgroups based on the composite temperature (A: room temperature; B: after 40 preheating cycles up to 55°C). Marginal gaps were measured using a stereomicroscope at ×40 and analyzed with two-way ANOVA. Inter- and intra-group comparisons were analyzed with post-hoc Tukey tests. Significance level was defined at P < 0.05. Results. The maximum and minimum gaps were detected in groups 1-A and 2-B, respectively. The effects of composite resin type, preheating and interactive effect of these variables on gap formation were significant (P

Objectives : The purpose of this study was to evaluate effect of additional light curing on microhardness and microleakage at cervical third of class II silorane-based composite restorations. Methods : Class II cavities were prepared on the proximal surfaces of 20 human premolars. The specimens were randomly divided into two groups of 10. In both groups, class II cavities were restored incrementally (gingival, oblique buccal and oblique lingual) with silorane-based composite (Filtek P90) and cured (group1: occlusal curing; group 2: additional curing from buccal and lingual). The samples were immersed in 0.5% fuchsine and dye penetration was recorded at the four regions of the gingival floor. Also, Vickers hardness test was performed at a distance of 1 mm above the gingival margin. Data were statistically analyzed using ANOVA after the evaluation of normal data distribution with Kolmogorov–Smirnov test at the 0.05 level of significance. Results: The two photo activation methods significantly affected the hardness (p=0.005) and microleakage (p=0.045). Additional light curing increased Vickers hardness when compared to occlusal curing. Comparison of microleakage in different areas of the first group did not show any significant difference (p=0.240) but the differences were significant between the different areas of the second group (p=0.028). Additional light curing decreased dye penetration in the all depths. Only in the H3 and M3, curing technique showed a significant effect on the results. Conclusions : Additional light curing would cause in better hardness and less microleakage. Therefore it is suggested after initial occlusal curing.

Objective: To compare the incidence of microleakage associated with contemporary esthetic restorative-adhesive systems following cyclic wet and dry storage as a representation to the dry mouth condition. Methods: Standardized cervical cavities in both buccal and lingual surfaces of 100 extracted human premolars were restored in 10 groups (n=10 with 20 cavities) using 7 contemporary esthetic restoratives and 3 adhesive systems following their manufacturers’ instructions. Cavities in groups 1–3 were restored with self-adhesive restoratives; conventional glass-ionomer (GI) (Ketac Molar Aplicap), resin modified glass-ionomer (RMGI) (Vitremer) and self-adhesive flowable composite (SAFC) (Fusio Liquid Dentin). Conventional flowable (FC) (Filtek Z350 Flow), nano-hybrid (HC) (Filtek Z250 XT) and nano-filled (NC) (Filtek Z350 XT) methacrylate-based composites were used in conjunction with total-etch, 2-step adhesive (Adper Single Bond 2) to restore cavities in groups 4–6. The same restoratives were also used to restore cavities in groups 8–10 in the presence of self-etch, 1-step adhesive (Adper Easy One), while cavities in group 7 were restored with silorane-based composite (Filtek P90) together with its specific adhesive system. Five restored teeth from each group (10 cavities) were subjected to cyclic storage in wet and dry environment, each for 12h/day and for a total period of 30days, while the other 5 were tested with no cyclic storage to serve as control. Using dye penetration technique, the associated microleakage was then scored from 0 to 4 for all restorations according to the depth of dye penetration at both occlusal and gingival interfaces. The incidences of each score were recorded in percentages and the numerical microleakage data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis and Mann–Whitney comparisons at α=0.05 to stand on the significance of differences detected between groups. Results: All restorative systems showed incidences of microleakage before and following cyclic storage in wet and dry environment with no specific manner declared for any. Statistical analysis of the scored data revealed no difference between different restorative systems under no storage condition, however HC, S and FC in groups 5, 7 and 8 showed higher rates of microleakage when subjected to cyclic wet-dry storage (Mann–Whitney, P0.05). For each restorative system, no significant difference (Kruskal–Wallis, P>0.05) was recorded between microleakage values recorded at occlusal and gingival interfaces. Conclusion: Occlusal and gingival sealing ability of flowable resin composite bonded with self-etch, 1-step adhesive is the most affected following cyclic wet-dry storage. Selection of such restorative option accordingly is not suggested for patients suffering from dry mouth.

Objectives This study aimed to assess the effect of 38% carbamide peroxide on the microleakage of class V cavities restored with either a silorane-based composite or two methacrylate-based composites. Materials and Methods A total of 96 class V cavities were prepared on the buccal surface of extracted human teeth with both enamel and dentin margins and were randomly assigned into three groups of Filtek P90 (3M-ESPE) + P90 system adhesive (3M-ESPE)(group A), Filtek Z250 (3M-ESPE) + Adper Prompt L-Pop (3M-ESPE)(group B) and Filtek Z350XT (3M-ESPE) + Adper Prompt L-Pop (group C). Half of the teeth were randomly underwent bleaching (38% carbamide peroxide, Day White, Discus Dental, applying for 15 min, twice a day for 14 day) while the remaining half (control) were not bleached. Dye penetration was measured following immersion in basic fuchsine. Data were statistically analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests at a level of 0.05. Results No significant differences were found between composites in the control groups in enamel (p = 0.171) or dentin (p = 0.094) margins. After bleaching, microleakage of Z250 (in enamel [p = 0.867] or dentin [p = 0.590] margins) and Z350 (in enamel [p = 0.445] or dentin [p = 0.591] margins) did not change significantly, but the microleakage of P90 significantly increased in both enamel (p = 0.042) and dentin (p = 0.002) margins. Conclusions No significant differences were noted between the bleached and control subgroups of two methacrylate-based composites in enamel or dentin margins. Microleakage of silorane-based composite significantly increased after bleaching.

Purpose To report one year clinical performance of two types of composite (silorane based versus methacrylate based) in class I preparations. Materials and methods A total of 15 patients (9 female and 6 male aged 20–40 years) participated in this study where 30 class I cavities were restored with either Filtek silorane (P90) or a methacrylate based composite (Tetric EvoCeram) representing two main groups (n = 15). Each patient received at least one pair of restoration. The cavity design was restricted to eliminate primary carious lesions. All restorations were subjected to a clinical follow up schedule representing (baseline, 6 months and 12 months) during which, two investigators rated the restorations according to the modified USPHS criteria evaluating marginal integrity, surface roughness, marginal discoloration, color match, anatomic form (wear), recurrent caries, retention of restoration and postoperative sensitivity. The data were collected, tabulated and statistically analyzed at a level of significance (P ≤ 0.05) using Friedman test, Chi-square and Fisher's exact test. Results Regarding the clinical performance of the tested materials there was no statistical significant difference among the different recall periods in all the tested criteria in both materials and no statistical significant difference between group I versus group II at all follow up periods (P > 0.05). In addition Kappa test revealed a statistical agreement between marginal discoloration as well as color match and both marginal integrity and surface roughness (P Conclusion 1-The clinical performance of silorane based composite (Filtek P90) was deemed acceptable after one year; with no obvious advantage compared to methacrylate based composite. 2-The low shrinkage associated with (Filtek P90) may not be a determinant factor for its high clinical performance.

Aims and Objectives: The purpose of this in vitro study was to investigate the effect of polishing systems on the microleakage of three different restorative materials (Ketac Molar Easymix, Ketac N100 and Filtek P90). Materials and Methods: Class V cavities were prepared at the cemento-enamel junction of 60 freshly extracted premolars. The prepared teeth were randomly divided into three groups and restored with the three materials. The restored teeth were stored in distilled water at 37°C for 1 week. The restored teeth were then divided into two subgroups (polished and not polished) of 10. Finishing and polishing of the polished group was done using the Sof-Lex polishing system. Furthermore, all the restorations were subjected to dye penetration testing. Results: Results showed that maximum microleakage was observed for the not polished group of Filtek P90 and least levels of microleakage were seen for the polished group of Ketac Molar Easymix. Conclusion: There was a significant difference seen when Ketac Molar Easymix was compared with Ketac N100 and Filtek P90 in terms of the extent of microleakage exhibited on polishing of the three materials; with the former exhibiting the least microleakage scores.

Objectives This study aimed to compare the micro-tensile bond strength of methacrylate resin systems to a silorane-based restorative system on dentin after 24 hours and six months water storage. Material and Methods The restorative systems Adper Single Bond 2/Filtek Z350 (ASB), Clearfil SE Bond/Z350 (CF), Adper SE Plus/Z350 (ASEP) and P90 Adhesive System/Filtek P90 (P90) were applied on flat dentin surfaces of 20 third molars (n=5). The restored teeth were sectioned perpendicularly to the bonding interface to obtain sticks (0.8 mm2) to be tested after 24 hours (24 h) and 6 months (6 m) of water storage, in a universal testing machine at 0.5 mm/min. The data was analyzed via two-way Analysis of Variance/Bonferroni post hoc tests at 5% global significance. Results Overall outcomes did not indicate a statistical difference for the resin systems (p=0.26) nor time (p=0.62). No interaction between material × time was detected (p=0.28). Mean standard-deviation in MPa at 24 h and 6 m were: ASB 31.38 (4.53) and 30.06 (1.95), CF 34.26 (3.47) and 32.75 (4.18), ASEP 29.54 (4.14) and 33.47 (2.47), P90 30.27 (2.03) and 31.34 (2.19). Conclusions The silorane-based system showed a similar performance to methacrylate-based materials on dentin. All systems were stable in terms of bond strength up to 6 month of water storage.

Aim and Objectives: To comparatively evaluate the microleakage and microgap formation along the gingival margin in class II cavities restored with silorane resin composite and methacrylate resin composite with and without flowable resin liner. Materials and Methods: Sixty human mandibular premolars were distributed into three groups, each group containing 20 teeth (n = 20). Mesial (subgroup A) and distal (subgroup B) box cavities were prepared with gingival margin above and below cemento enamel junction (CEJ), respectively, in each tooth and restored as follows — Group I — Silorane resin composite with self-etch primer and bond (Filtek P90, 3M ESPE MN, USA). Group II — Methacrylate resin composite (Filtek P60, 3M ESPE MN, USA) and self-etch adhesive (Adper Easy one, 3M ESPE MN, USA). Group III — Methacrylate resin composite with self-etch adhesive and a flowable resin liner (Filtek Z350 XT, 3M ESPE MN, USA). The teeth were thermocycled and immersed in 50% silver nitrate solution before sectioning. The specimens were observed under scanning electron microscope for dye penetration and microgap formation. The data was subjected to statistical analysis using Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test using SPSS version 18. Results: Subgroup A in all the three groups showed significantly less microleakage and microgap formation compared to subgroup B with P < 0.05. Intergroup comparison of subgroup A did not show statistically significant difference, whereas subgroup B showed statistically significant difference for microleakage between group I and group II (P = 0.003), group III and group II (P = 0.002). Conclusion: Silorane resin composite and methacrylate resin with liner showed significantly less microleakage in class II cavities along the gingival margin placed below CEJ compared to methacrylate resin without liner. All the study groups showed less microleakage and microgap formation along the gingival margin placed above CEJ.

Aim This study investigated the effect of TiF4 solution pretreatment on microleakage of silorane and nanofilled methacrylatebased composites in class V cavities. Materials and methods Forty-eight intact premolar teeth were randomly allocated to four groups of 12 teeth. Restorative techniques after standard class V tooth preparations were as follows: Group 1, Filtek P90 composite; group 2, Filtek Z350 XT; group 3, TiF4 solution pretreatment and Filtek P90 composite; group 4, TiF4 solution pretreatment and Filtek Z350 XT. After storing the specimens in distilled water at 37°C for 24 hours and followed by immersion of the specimens in a 0.5% basic-fuchsin solution for 24 hours, they were sectioned buccolingually to obtain four surfaces for each specimen for analysis of microleakage using a stereomicroscope. Data analysis was performed using Kruskal-Wallis test to compare the four groups and the Mann- Whitney test for paired comparisons with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 17 software. Results At the enamel margins, microleakage score of the Filtek Z350 XT group was lower than those of the Filtek P90 with and without the application of the TiF4 (p = 0.009 and p = 0.031 respectively). At the dentin margins, groups 3 and 4 (TiF4+Filtek P90 and TiF4+Filtek z350 XT respectively) showed significantly lower microleakage than group 1 (Filtek P90). However, there was no significant difference between other groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion At the enamel margins, microleakage score of the silorane-based composite was more than that of the nanofilled composite. No significant differences were observed between the other groups. At the dentin margins, for the silorane-based composite restorations, TiF4 solution pretreatment resulted in significantly lower microleakage. However, the similar result was not observed for Filtek Z350 XT. Also, no significant difference was observed between microleakage scores of Filtek P90 and Filtek Z350 XT with or without TiF4 pretreatment. Clinical significance In spite of better mechanical and physical properties of modern composites than earlier methacrylate-based composites, polymerization shrinkage has been remaining as one of the main shortcomings of them. Different methods, such as using new low shrinkage resin composites and different dentin pretreatments, have been suggested to overcome this problem. This study evaluated the effect of TiF4 as pretreatment on microleakage of class V tooth preparations restored with a nanocomposite and a silorane-based resin composite. How to cite this article Koohpeima F, Sharafeddin F, Jowkar Z, Ahmadzadeh S, Mokhtari MJ, Azarian B. Role of TiF4 in Microleakage of Silorane and Methacrylate-based Composite Resins in Class V Cavities. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(3):240-247.

Objectives: To evaluate the influence of various photoactivation techniques on the internal gap, Knoop-hardness, and polymerization depth of silorane-and methacrylate-based composites in Class II restorationsMethods: Preparations were made in third molars (n = 10), according to composites (Filtek P60: methacrylate; Filtek P90: silorane) and photoactivation techniques (OC: occlusal photoactivation (control); OBL: occlusal+buccal+lingual photoactivation; and BLO: buccal+lingual+occlusal photoactivation (transdental)). Composites were inserted in two increments, both individually photoactivated for 20s. After 24h, specimens were sectioned and the ratio of internal gaps to interface length (%) recorded. Hardness was tested across the transversal section of restorations (1-4 mm below the surface)Results: Silorane restorations showed significantly lower gaps compared with methacrylate, regardless of polymerization technique (PConclusions: Internal gaps and hardness are affected by composite type and photoactivation. Despite the reduced values, hardness of silorane is not influenced by photoactivation or by depth. Internal gaps are dependent on the energy dose for both composites, with silorane showing lower internal gaps. (Eur J Dent 2012;6:133-140)

AimThe aim of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the proximal contact of a silorane-based resin composite with a conventional methacrylate-based resin composite in class II restorations after a 6 months follow-up period.Materials and methodsAfter obtaining informed consent, 33 patients were randomly allocated into a test group (Filtek P90/Adhesive System-3M ESPE) or control group (Filtek P60/ Adper SE Plus-3M ESPE), and 100 direct resin composite restorations (n = 50) were placed. A single operator performed the cavities and restorations. After rubber dam placement, a metal matrix and wooden wedge were placed. The restorative systems were applied according to the manufacturer's instructions. After 1 week, the restorations were finished and polished. The proximal contacts were assessed blindly and independently by two calibrated examiners (kW = 0.8) at the baseline and after 6 months according to a three-step grading criteria. Data were analyzed with the Mann-Whitney U-test and Wilcoxon signed Rank tests (α = 0.05). Results: After 6 months, 96% of the restoration contacts were present for evaluation. The frequencies of restorations classified as Bravo in control and test groups were 6 and 8% at the baseline, and 6.25 and 12.75% after 6 months. No significant difference was found between the restorative materials (p > 0.05; Mann-Whitney U-test) neither between baseline and 6 months period (p > 0.05; Wilcoxon signed Rank tests).ConclusionBoth materials performed satisfactorily over 6 months follow-up period.Clinical significanceThe short-term clinical performance of a silorane-based resin composite in the proximal contacts of class II restorations was similar to the well-known methacrylate-based resin composite.How to cite this articleGonçalves FS, Castro CDL, Bueno AC, de Freitas ABDA, Moreira AN, Magalhães CS. The Shortterm Clinical Performance of a Silorane-based Resin Composite in the Proximal Contacts of Class II Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13(3):251-256.

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the behavior of a resin-based 2,2-bis (p-[2′-hydroxy-3′-methacryloxypropoxy] phenylene) propane and a composite resin modified with oxirane, regarding the ability of marginal sealing, both with direct restorations and indirect restorations. Materials and Methods: To achieve this, mesio- and disto-occlusal cavities were made on the same tooth, totalling 100 cavities. These cavities were restored with two materials, Filtek P90 (3M ESPE) and Opallis (FGM). Then, they were divided into two groups: Fifty direct restorations, each sample restored with the two materials, following the manufacturer's protocol and fifty indirect restorations, and then cemented with a paste obtained by diluting the resin in its adhesive. The templates were thermally cycled, 30 s at 5°C and 30 s at 55°C for 500 cycles and then were immersed in methylene blue for 24 h. Afterward, they were trimmed using a plaster trimmer from occlusal toward a gingival direction. These samples were analyzed with stereomicroscope (×3) by two blinded observers. Then, a system which considers the average number of surrounding walls that have suffered infiltration on a scale of 0–3 was used. Results: Data were subjected to statistical analysis (Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests) with a significance level of 5% maximum. Conclusion: It was concluded that the indirect restorations showed the greatest number of restorations with score 0 and 1 (34) and lowest score 2 and 3 (16). This suggests that indirect restorations regardless of the material used behaved more effectively regarding the marginal sealing of restorations.

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of tri-antibiotic paste (TAP) on microtensile bond strengths (MTBS) of dental adhesives to dentin. Materials and methods Sixty extracted molars had their occlusal surfaces flattened to expose dentin. They were divided into two groups, i.e., control group with no dentin treatment and experimental group with dentin treatment with TAP. After 10 days, specimens were bonded using self-etch (Filtek P90 adhesive) or etch-and-rinse (Adper Single Bond Plus) adhesives and restored with composite resin. Teeth were sectioned into beams, and the specimens were subjected to MTBS test. Data were analyzed using two-way ANOVA and post hoc Tukey tests. Results There was a statistically significant interaction between dentin treatment and adhesive on MTBS to coronal dentin (p = 0.003). Despite a trend towards worse MTBS being noticed in the experimental groups, TAP application showed no significant effect on MTBS (p = 0.064). Conclusions The etch-and-rinse adhesive Adper Single Bond Plus presented higher mean bond strengths than the self-etch adhesive Filtek P90, irrespective of the group. The superior bond performance for Adper Single Bond when compared to Filtek P90 adhesive was confirmed by a fewer number of adhesive failures. The influence of TAP in bond strength is insignificant.

Objective The objective was to evaluate and compare the fracture resistance of human maxillary premolars teeth restored with low shrinkage microhybrid composite Silorane-based; Filtek P90 LS, conventional methacrylate-based nanohybrid composite; Ceram X Mono, and two types of fiber-reinforced composites (FRCs); Alert and XENIUS base, micro glass fibers and short glass fibers, respectively in mesio-occluso-distal cavities. Materials and methods A total of 45 human maxillary premolars were selected. Standardized mesio-occluso-distal cavities were prepared in all teeth. Five prepared teeth received no treatment and served as controls (group 1). A total of 40 teeth were randomly divided into four experimental groups (n = 10); group 2: low shrinkage Silorane-based composite, group 3: nanohybrid resin composite, group 4: microfibers reinforced resin composite, and group 5: short fibers reinforced resin composite. Restorations were done for all groups. After being stored 24 h at 37°C, fracture resistance was measured in a universal Instron testing machine by using a 4 mm diameter steel sphere which was applied on tooth buccal and lingual cusps at a cross-head speed of 2 mm/min until fracture occurred. Statistical analysis One-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post-hoc test. Results Highest mean fracture resistance was observed with FRC, nanohybrid, Silorane and lastly with control respectively. Statistically Significant difference was revealed by analysis of variance (P ≤ 0.0001) and Tukey's post-hoc test (P ≤ 0.0001). Conclusion Among the experimental groups, FRC showed the highest fracture resistance.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of lactic acid and acetic acid on the microhardness of a silorane-based composite compared to two methacrylate-based composite resins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty disc-shaped specimens each were fabricated of Filtek P90, Filtek Z250 and Filtek Z350XT. After measuring of Vickers microhardness, they were randomly divided into 3 subgroups (n = 10) and immersed in lactic acid, acetic acid or distilled water. Microhardness was measured after 48 hr and 7 day of immersion. Data were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA (p < 0.05). The surfaces of two additional specimens were evaluated using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) before and after immersion. RESULTS: All groups showed a reduction in microhardness after 7 day of immersion (p < 0.001). At baseline and 7 day, the microhardness of Z250 was the greatest, followed by Z350 and P90 (p < 0.001). At 48 hr, the microhardness values of Z250 and Z350 were greater than P90 (p < 0.001 for both), but those of Z250 and Z350 were not significantly different (p = 0.095). Also, the effect of storage media on microhardness was not significant at baseline, but significant at 48 hr and after 7 day (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Lactic acid had the greatest effect. CONCLUSIONS: The microhardness of composites decreased after 7 day of immersion. The microhardness of P90 was lower than that of other composites. Lactic acid caused a greater reduction in microhardness compared to other solutions.

Aim : Our study aimed to analyze the microleakage of silorane-based composite in comparison to two homologous methacrylate-based composites. Materials and Methods : Standardized class I cavities (4 × 2.5 × 3 mm) were prepared on extracted human premolars and randomly assigned into three groups (N = 15) as follows: Group A, Filtek P90 (silorane) with its dedicated adhesive system (P90 system adhesive); Group B, Adper SE Plus with Filtek Z250; Group C, Peak SE with Amelogen Plus. The teeth were subjected to thermocycling regime (200×, 5-55°C) and dye penetration of tooth sections were evaluated following 30 minute immersion in 2% Methylene Blue dye. Statistical analysis was performed with Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test at 95% significance level. Results : Silorane exhibited significantly decreased microleakage compared with any other resin based composite (RBC). The cavities restored with Amelogen Plus displayed nonsignificantly higher microleakage than with Filtek Z250. Conclusion : Although all of the restorative systems had microleakage, silorane technology showed less microleakage comparable to clinically successful methacrylate-based composite. This will improve the clinical performance and extend the composite durability.