Abstract
Context: Nanocomposites are becoming popular today because of the manufacturers claiming high surface smoothness and good abrasion resistance properties thus improving the longevity of the restoration. Aims: This in vitro study was carried out to investigate the effect of nanofillers on surface roughness and abrasion resistance of nanofilled composite- Filtek Z350 (3M ESPE) and nanohybrid composite- Tetric N Ceram (Ivoclar Vivadent) after polishing and abrasion. Methods and material: A total of fifteen disc specimens of each category of material were prepared under standardized conditions. The discs were finished and polished according to manufacturer's instructions. The samples were examined for surface roughness using Mahr Perthometer M2 followed by scanning electron microscope examination. In order to assess the performance of the materials in simulated oral conditions the samples were then subjected to toothbrush-dentifrice abrasion and the resultant surface roughness was compared for both the materials. Statistical analysis: Mean value of surface roughness was calculated for both the groups from Ra values before and after toothbrush- dentifrice abrasion followed by calculation of Standard deviation (SD). Paired-t test was then applied to compare the surface roughness values before and after toothbrush-dentifrice abrasion within the same group. Results: Initially the surface roughness of Filtek Z350 were found to be superior to Tetric N Ceram but after subjecting to toothbrush dentifrice abrasion Tetric N Ceram showed greater increase in surface roughness as compared to Filtek Z350. The difference was found to be statistically significant. Conclusions: Nanofiller type, size and distribution significantly influence the surface properties of composites. Though nanohybrid composite showed a better initial surface polish but nanofilled composite showed a better abrasion resistance.
Highlights
Filler particle size and morphology are very crucial to the physical properties and clinical performance of composites [1]
Statistical analysis: Mean value of surface roughness was calculated for both the groups from Ra values before and after toothbrushdentifrice abrasion followed by calculation of Standard deviation (SD)
This indicated that surface roughness of Tetric N Ceram was lower than that of Filtek Z350 and the difference was found to be statistically significant
Summary
Filler particle size and morphology are very crucial to the physical properties and clinical performance of composites [1]. Hybrid composites on the other hand possess fillers of different sizes leading to high filler content and show higher physical strength and acceptable polymerization shrinkage. They exhibit poor surface polish retention [2,3,4,5,6]. Nanocomposites have been recently introduced to serve these functional needs through the application of nanotechnology [7] They have improved mechanical properties i.e. better compressive strength, diametrical tensile strength, fracture resistance, wear resistance, low polymerization shrinkage, high translucency, high polish retention and better esthetics [8,9]. With such excellent properties they could turn out to be a cost-effective, time saving and easy to repair and finish alternative to ceramics as laminate materials
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International Journal of Dentistry and Oral Health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
