» Articles » PMID: 36704183

Comparison of the Effect of Preheating on the Flexural Strength of Giomer and Nanohybrid Composite Resin

Overview
Specialty Dentistry
Date 2023 Jan 27
PMID 36704183
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Considering the increased use of preheating and novel resin-based materials to restore teeth, the present study investigated the impact of preheating on the flexural strength of a giomer and compared it with a nanohybrid composite resin. Two restorative materials (Beautifil II giomer and Alpha III nanohybrid composite resin) were used. Thirty rod-shaped samples (adding up to 60 samples) were prepared from the materials above and divided into two subgroups: with and without preheating (n=15). Before sample preparation, the giomer and nanohybrid composite resin tubes were preheated at 68ºC for 15 minutes in the preheating subgroups. In the subgroups without preheating, the tubes were kept in a room at 25ºC. Then the flexural strength was compared between the two groups with two-way ANOVA at a significance level of <0.05. The results showed significantly higher flexural strength in the preheated subgroups than in the non-preheated subgroups (<0.001). In addition, the mean flexural strength values were significantly higher in the giomer groups than in the nanohybrid composite resin groups (<0.001). Preheating increased the studied materials' flexural strengths significantly. The flexural strength of the giomer restorative material was higher than that of the nanohybrid composite resin, irrespective of preheating.

Citing Articles

Effects of pre-heating on physical-mechanical-chemical properties of contemporary resin composites.

Bueno T, Masoud N, Akkus A, Silva I, McPherson K, Furuse A Odontology. 2024; 113(1):135-142.

PMID: 38797796 DOI: 10.1007/s10266-024-00953-x.


Examining the Impact of Preheating on the Fracture Toughness and Microhardness of Composite Resin: A Systematic Review.

Bhopatkar J, Ikhar A, Chandak M, Patel A, Agrawal P Cureus. 2023; 15(10):e47117.

PMID: 38022172 PMC: 10647940. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47117.

References
1.
Jyothi K, Annapurna S, Kumar A, Venugopal P, Jayashankara C . Clinical evaluation of giomer- and resin-modified glass ionomer cement in class V noncarious cervical lesions: An in vivo study. J Conserv Dent. 2011; 14(4):409-13. PMC: 3227292. DOI: 10.4103/0972-0707.87214. View

2.
Kimyai S, Savadi-Oskoee S, Ajami A, Sadr A, Asdagh S . Effect of three prophylaxis methods on surface roughness of giomer. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2010; 16(1):e110-4. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.16.e110. View

3.
Calheiros F, Daronch M, Rueggeberg F, Braga R . Effect of temperature on composite polymerization stress and degree of conversion. Dent Mater. 2014; 30(6):613-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2014.02.024. View

4.
Deb S, Di Silvio L, Mackler H, Millar B . Pre-warming of dental composites. Dent Mater. 2010; 27(4):e51-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.dental.2010.11.009. View

5.
Par M, Gubler A, Attin T, Tarle Z, Tarle A, Taubock T . Experimental Bioactive Glass-Containing Composites and Commercial Restorative Materials: Anti-Demineralizing Protection of Dentin. Biomedicines. 2021; 9(11). PMC: 8615840. DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines9111616. View