Effect of filler type on 3-body abrasion of dental composite

• Main Authors: Yasini E., Ataei M., Amini M
• Format: Article
• Language: fas
• Published: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2005-06-01
• Series: Journal of Dental Medicine
• Subjects: Filler; Wear; Leucite
• Online Access: http://journals.tums.ac.ir/PdfMed.aspx?pdf_med=/upload_files/pdf/1924.pdf&manuscript_id=1924
• ISSN: 1024-641X; 2008-2444

Statement of Problem: The relatively poor wear resistance of dental composite in stress bearing posterior situations has restricted wider clinical application of this restorative material. Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the three body abrasive wear of a dental composite based on a new filler (leucite: KAl Si2O6) and to compare it with the wear resistance of a composite based on commonly used Aluminium – Barium Silicate filler. Materials and Methods: This research was an interventional study done in Iran polymer institute. Five specimens were considered in each group. All ceramic IPS Empress® (Ivoclar- Vivadent) ingots based on leucite crystals were ball milled, passed through an 800 sieve and used as filler. Experimental composites were prepared by mixing the silane- treated fillers with monomers (BisGMA and TEGDMA). Camphorquinone and amine were used as photoinitiator system. Degree of conversion of the light-cured and post-cured composites was measured using FTIR spectroscopy. The prepared pastes were inserted into plexy-glass mold and light cured (700 mw/cm2, 40 s). Then for maximum degree of conversion specimens were post- cured (120ºC, 5 hours). Three body abrasion wear testing was performed using a wear machine with 50 rpm rotational movement. In this machine, pumice (150 meshes) was used as the third body. Weight loss of specimens in each group was measured by balance after each 50 hours. After wear testing SEM examination was made specimens in each group. The data were analyzed and compared using ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests (P<0.05). Tetric Ceram was tested as commercial composite. Results: There were significantly differences between three body abrasive wear of composites. The ranking from lowest to highest was as follows: leucite composite (19%) < Tetric Ceram (22%) < glass composite (28%). leucite composite showed the highest wear resistance value, propably due to the crystalliniy and hardness of filler. Conclusion: Introduction of this new filler as an alternative to glass filler, significantly increases the wear resistance of the resin composites. Further investigations on mechanical properties of new composites would be beneficial in the development of new dental materials.