Influence of the Self-adhering Strategy on Microhardness, Sorption, Solubility, Color Stability, and Cytotoxicity Compared to Bulk-fill and Conventional Resin Composites

Overview

Journal Clin Oral Investig

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2022 Aug 2

PMID 35916952

Authors

Natalia Gomes de Oliveira

Luis Felipe Espindola-Castro

Julliana Carvalho Rocha

Amanda Pinheiro de Barros Albuquerque

Moacyr Jesus Barreto de Melo Rego

Gabriela Queiroz de Melo Monteiro

Marianne de Vasconcelos Carvalho

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze and compare, in vitro, the microhardness, sorption, solubility, color stability, and cytotoxicity of three types of resin composites: self-adhesive (SARC) (Dyad Flow (DF)/Kerr), bulk-fill (Filtek Bulk Fill Flow (FBF)/3 M ESPE), and conventional (Filtek Z350XT Flow (Z350)/3 M ESPE).

Materials And Methods: Thirty cylindrical specimens were prepared using a split metal mold (15 mm × 1 mm), divided into 3 groups (n = 10) according to the material used. Vickers hardness (VH) was calculated from three indentations (300gf/15 s) per specimen. The sorption and solubility were measured according to the ISO 4049:2009 specification after storing in distilled water for 7 days. The color of each resin composite was measured using a portable digital spectrophotometer according to the CIELAB system. After a 7-day immersion in coffee, the color variation (∆E) was calculated. Following the ISO 10993:2012, the cytotoxicity in Vero cells was evaluated through the MTT assay. The results were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis test to compare the studied groups. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the assessments in each studied group. For cytotoxicity analysis, the data were compared by the ANOVA test (α = 0.05).

Results: DF showed the lowest VH (28.67), highest sorption (0.543 µg/mm) and solubility (1.700 µg/mm), and higher ∆E after 7 days of coffee immersion (p = 0.008). The resin composites studied were considered non-cytotoxic.

Conclusions: The SARC presented inferior mechanical and physical-chemical properties than bulk-fill and conventional resin composites, with comparable cytotoxicity against Vero cells.

Clinical Relevance: The simplification of the clinical protocol of SARC can minimize the number of possible failures during the restorative technique. However, considering their inferior physical and mechanical properties, their coverage with materials of higher mechanical properties and physical-chemical stability should be considered.

References

de Oliveira N, Lima A, da Silveira M, de Souza Araujo P, de Melo Monteiro G, de Vasconcelos Carvalho M . Evaluation of postoperative sensitivity in restorations with self-adhesive resin: a randomized split-mouth design controlled study. Clin Oral Investig. 2019; 24(5):1829-1835. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-019-03046-0. View

De Brito O, de Oliveira I, Monteiro G . Hydrolytic and Biological Degradation of Bulk-fill and Self-adhering Resin Composites. Oper Dent. 2019; 44(5):E223-E233. DOI: 10.2341/17-390-L. View

Szesz A, Parreiras S, Martini E, Reis A, Loguercio A . Effect of flowable composites on the clinical performance of non-carious cervical lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dent. 2017; 65:11-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.07.007. View

Canali G, Ignacio S, Rached R, Souza E . One-year clinical evaluation of bulk-fill flowable vs. regular nanofilled composite in non-carious cervical lesions. Clin Oral Investig. 2018; 23(2):889-897. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2509-8. View

Durao M, de Andrade A, Santos M, Montes M, de Melo Monteiro G . Clinical Performance of Bulk-Fill Resin Composite Restorations Using the United States Public Health Service and Federation Dentaire Internationale Criteria: A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial. Eur J Dent. 2020; 15(2):179-192. PMC: 8184274. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1718639. View

Marigo L, Spagnuolo G, Malara F, Martorana G, Cordaro M, Lupi A . Relation between conversion degree and cytotoxicity of a flowable bulk-fill and three conventional flowable resin-composites. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2015; 19(23):4469-80. View

Piola Rizzante F, Duque J, Duarte M, Mondelli R, Mendonca G, Ishikiriama S . Polymerization shrinkage, microhardness and depth of cure of bulk fill resin composites. Dent Mater J. 2019; 38(3):403-410. DOI: 10.4012/dmj.2018-063. View

Maas M, Alania Y, Natale L, Rodrigues M, Watts D, Braga R . Trends in restorative composites research: what is in the future?. Braz Oral Res. 2017; 31(suppl 1):e55. DOI: 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2017.vol31.0055. View

Shafiei F, Saadat M . Micromorphology and bond strength evaluation of adhesive interface of a self-adhering flowable composite resin-dentin: Effect of surface treatment. Microsc Res Tech. 2016; 79(5):403-7. DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22643. View

10.

Pan Y, Xu X, Sun F, Meng X . Surface morphology and mechanical properties of conventional and self-adhesive resin cements after aqueous aging. J Appl Oral Sci. 2018; 27:e20170449. PMC: 6223788. DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2017-0449. View

11.

Ferracane J, Stansbury J, Burke F . Self-adhesive resin cements - chemistry, properties and clinical considerations. J Oral Rehabil. 2010; 38(4):295-314. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02148.x. View

12.

Hanabusa M, Mine A, Kuboki T, Momoi Y, van Landuyt K, Van Meerbeek B . TEM interfacial characterization of an experimental self-adhesive filling material bonded to enamel/dentin. Dent Mater. 2011; 27(8):818-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2011.04.007. View

13.

Chesterman J, Jowett A, Gallacher A, Nixon P . Bulk-fill resin-based composite restorative materials: a review. Br Dent J. 2017; 222(5):337-344. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2017.214. View

15.

Espindola-Castro L, Durao M, Pereira T, Cordeiro A, Monteiro G . Evaluation of microhardness, sorption, solubility, and color stability of bulk fill resins: A comparative study. J Clin Exp Dent. 2020; 12(11):e1033-e1038. PMC: 7680569. DOI: 10.4317/jced.57599. View

16.

Hashemikamangar S, Meymand M, Kharazifard M, Valizadeh S . Surface microhardness of a self-adhesive composite in comparison with conventional composite resins. Dent Med Probl. 2020; 57(3):247-253. DOI: 10.17219/dmp/118123. View

17.

Shiozawa M, Takahashi H, Asakawa Y, Iwasaki N . Color stability of adhesive resin cements after immersion in coffee. Clin Oral Investig. 2014; 19(2):309-17. DOI: 10.1007/s00784-014-1272-8. View

18.

Espindola-Castro L, de Brito O, Araujo L, Santos I, de Melo Monteiro G . In Vitro Evaluation of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Light-Curing Resin Cement: A Comparative Study. Eur J Dent. 2020; 14(1):152-156. PMC: 7069750. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1705075. View

19.

Liebermann A, Wimmer T, Schmidlin P, Scherer H, Loffler P, Roos M . Physicomechanical characterization of polyetheretherketone and current esthetic dental CAD/CAM polymers after aging in different storage media. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 115(3):321-8.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.09.004. View

20.

Blackham J, Vandewalle K, Lien W . Properties of hybrid resin composite systems containing prepolymerized filler particles. Oper Dent. 2009; 34(6):697-702. DOI: 10.2341/08-118-L. View

21.

Alshali R, Salim N, Satterthwaite J, Silikas N . Long-term sorption and solubility of bulk-fill and conventional resin-composites in water and artificial saliva. J Dent. 2015; 43(12):1511-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jdent.2015.10.001. View