Comparison of two video-imaging instruments for measuring volumetric shrinkage of dental resin composites

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to measure the polymerization shrinkage of three dental resin composites using two commercially available video-imaging devices to determine if the devices produced equivalent results. METHODS: Small, semi-spherical specimens of a microhybrid (Venus), microfill (Filtek A110), and flowable (Esthet*X Flow) resin composite were manually formed and light activated for 40s using a light-curing unit. The volumetric polymerization shrinkage of fifteen specimens of each brand of resin composite was measured using the AcuVol and the Drop Shape Analysis System model DSA10 Mk2 (DSAS) video-imaging devices. Mean volumetric shrinkage values were calculated for each resin composite and equivalence was evaluated using the two one-sided tests approach. Differences between the means that were less than approximately 5% of the observed shrinkage were considered indicative of clinical equivalence. RESULTS: Mean volumetric shrinkage values measured for the resin composites were: Venus (AcuVol, 3.07+/-0.07%; DSAS, 2.90+/-0.07%); Filtek A110 (AcuVol, 2.26+/-0.10%; DSAS, 2.25+/-0.09%); and Esthet*X Flow (AcuVol, 5.01+/-0.17%; DSAS, 5.14+/-0.11%). Statistical analysis revealed that the two imaging devices produced equivalent results for Filtek A110 and Esthet*X Flow but not for Venus. CONCLUSIONS: Video-imaging systems provide an easy method for measuring volumetric shrinkage of resin composites. As with other methods for measuring volumetric shrinkage, however, they are best used to comparatively measure different materials within the same laboratory.     

Volumetric polymerization shrinkage of resin composites under simulated intraoral temperature and humidity conditions

This study measured the volumetric shrinkage of resin composites polymerized under temperature and humidity conditions simulating the oral cavity and compared them to those occurring under ambient room conditions. Small, semispherical specimens of a microhybrid (Z100), microfill (Filtek A110) and flowable microhybrid (4 Seasons Flow) resin composite were manually formed and light activated for 40 seconds using a halogen light-curing unit (Spectrum Curing Light). The volumetric polymerization shrinkage of 10 specimens of each brand of resin composite was measured using a drop shape analysis unit (Drop Shape Analysis System, model DSA10 Mk2) under each of two temperature/relative humidity conditions: room conditions (22 +/- 2 degrees C and 60 +/- 5%) and those simulating intraoral conditions (35 degrees C and 92 +/- 5%). Mean volumetric shrinkage values were calculated for each resin composite and the data were analyzed using two-way analysis of variance and t-test (a=0.05) to determine if significant differences existed between the amount of volumetric polymerization shrinkage that occurred under ambient room conditions and that which occurred under simulated intraoral conditions. Mean volumetric shrinkage values measured for the resin composites were: 2.26 +/- 0.04% (ambient) and 2.61 +/- 0.04% (intraoral) for Z100; 1.96 +/- 0.04% (ambient) and 2.28 +/- 0.04% (intraoral) for Filtek A110 and 4.53 +/- 0.06% (ambient) and 5.34 +/- 0.05% (intraoral) for 4 Seasons Flow. For each resin composite, statistical analysis indicated that the amount of volumetric shrinkage measured under simulated intraoral conditions was significantly greater than what was measured under ambient room conditions (p<0.0001).     

Evaluation of polymerization shrinkage of bulk-fill resin composites using microcomputed tomography

This study evaluated the influence of cavity depth on polymerization shrinkage of bulk-fill resin composites with and without adhesive resin. Standardized     

Polymerization shrinkage of visible-light-cured composites

This study investigated the long-term dimensional changes of a conventional and a polyacid-modified composite resin and the effects of hydration on polymerization shrinkage. A strain-monitoring device was used to measure the linear polymerization shrinkage of the composites in the free state when stored in water at 37 degrees C or air at 26 degrees C over a one-month period. Results showed that the polymerization reaction of both conventional and polyacid-modified composite resins was accompanied by a dimensional shrinkage change. The rate of shrinkage for both composites was greatest during the polymerization reaction and continued after removal of the curing light. When stored in water, the greatest shrinkage was noted at one hour for both materials. This was followed by a slow uptake of water and expansion from one day to one month. The polyacid-modified composite had significantly less polymerization shrinkage than the conventional composite after one month of storage in water.     

Polymerization shrinkage of densely-filled resin composites

A new group of restorative materials called "packable" composites has recently been introduced. These products are essentially highly-filled or densely-filled hybrid resin composites. One of the many claims made about these materials is that they undergo less polymerization shrinkage than their conventional counterparts. This in vitro investigation compared the amount of linear shrinkage that occurs within a variety of densely filled resin composites (DFC) and conventional hybrid resin composites when cured with a visible halogen light. Six DFC resins (Alert, Ariston, P60, Prodigy, Solitaire and Surefil) and two hybrids (TPH-Spectrum, Z100) were used in this study. Dimensional change was measured in a linear direction using a calibrated light microscope. Eighty samples of resin composite were tested, resulting in eight groups of 10 samples (N=10) each. The one-way ANOVA with Student-Newman-Keuls post-hoc test was used to compare the shrinkage between groups, and Pearson's Correlation was used to test the relationship between filler characteristics and shrinkage. Alert and P-60 had significantly less shrinkage than Solitaire, Ariston, Prodigy, Z-100 and TPH-S. Thus, the shrinkage values of some DFC resins were significantly less and others were no different from conventional hybrid resins. There is a moderate association between filler volume and shrinkage. Filler size and resin chemistry are other factors that may also effect shrinkage.     

Direction of shrinkage of light-curing resin composites

It is occasionally stated in the dental literature that light-curing resin composites shrink towards the light source. As light travels at the speed of light, this dictum is not obvious. It was the purpose of the present study to investigate the direction of shrinkage of a light-curing resin composite in relation to the attachment and the thickness of the material. The resin composite was applied in cylindrical brass molds in such a manner that a flash, serving as attachment, was produced at one side of the specimens, while the material was flush with the mold at the other side. The specimens were now irradiated from either the flash or the flush side, and the convexity or the concavity of the specimens was measured. At a material thickness of 3 mm, the shrinkage was towards the light source, irrespective of the position of the flash. At 4 and 5 mm thickness of the molds, the direction of shrinkage could be directed towards or away from the light source, depending on the position of the flash. The number of light quanta emitted from the light source and passing through the material was compared with the number of molecules of camphorquinone present in a resin composite of 3, 4, or 5 mm thickness. It was concluded that under the conditions of the present study, the direction of shrinkage was the result of an interplay between the direction of the light, the attachment of the material, and the thickness of the material.     

Direction of shrinkage of light-curing resin composites

It is occasionally stated in the dental literature that light-curing resin composites shrink towards the light source. As light travels at the speed of light, this dictum is not obvious. It was the purpose of the present study to investigate the direction of shrinkage of a light-curing resin composite in relation to the attachment and the thickness of the material. The resin composite was applied in cylindrical brass molds in such a manner that a flash, serving as attachment, was produced at one side of the specimens, while the material was flush with the mold at the other side. The specimens were now irradiated from either the flash or the flush side, and the convexity or the concavity of the specimens was measured. At a material thickness of 3 mm, the shrinkage was towards the light source, irrespective of the position of the flash. At 4 and 5 mm thickness of the molds, the direction of shrinkage could be directed towards or away from the light source, depending on the position of the flash. The number of light quanta emitted from the light source and passing through the material was compared with the number of molecules of camphorquinone present in a resin composite of 3, 4, or 5 mm thickness. It was concluded that under the conditions of the present study, the direction of shrinkage was the result of an interplay between the direction of the light, the attachment of the material, and the thickness of the material.     

Polymerization shrinkage and shrinkage stress development in ultra-rapid photo-polymerized bulk fill resin composites

ObjectiveTo determine the polymerization shrinkage (%) and shrinkage stress (MPa) characteristics of ultra-rapid photo-polymerized bulk fill resin composites.MethodsTwo ultra-rapid photo-polymerized bulk fill (URPBF) materials: PFill and PFlow were studied, along with their comparators ECeram and EFlow. PFill contains an addition fragmentation chain transfer (AFCT) agent. The URPBR materials were irradiated using two different 3 s high irradiance protocols (3000 and 3200 mW/cm² based on Bluephase PowerCure and VALO LCUs, respectively) and one 10 s standard protocol (1200 mW/cm² based on a Bluephase PowerCure LCU). Bonded disk and Bioman II instruments were used to measure Polymerization shrinkage % and shrinkage stress MPa, respectively, for 60 min at 23 ± 1 °C (n = 5). Maximum shrinkage-rate and maximum shrinkage stress-rate were also calculated for 15 s via numerical differentiation. The data were analyzed via multiple One-way ANOVA and Tukey post-hoc tests (α = 0.05).ResultsPFill groups, regardless of their irradiance protocol, showed significantly lower PS than the comparator, ECeram (p < 0.05). However, PFlow irradiated via different protocols, was comparable to EFlow and ECeram (p > 0.05). PFill consistently produced stress results which were significantly lower than ECeram (p < 0.05) and were comparable for both high irradiance protocols (p > 0.05). PFlow only exhibited significantly higher shrinkage stress when polymerized with the 3 sVALO protocol (p < 0.05).The maximum shrinkage strain-rate (%/s) was significantly lower in PFill-10s and PFill-3s groups (using PowerCure LCU) compared to ECeram. However, no differences were seen between PFlow and EFlow (p > 0.05). The maximum shrinkage stress-rate of PFill and PFlow was comparable between different irradiation protocols, as well as to their comparator ECeram (p > 0.05).SignificanceHigh irradiation protocols over ultra-short periods led to slightly lower shrinkage strain but slightly higher stress, possibly due to reduced network mobility. The AFCT agent incorporated in PFill composite seemed to reduce shrinkage stress development, even with high irradiance protocols.     

Effects of application method on shrinkage vectors and volumetric shrinkage of bulk-fill composites in class-II restorations

ObjectivesUpon initial proximal wall construction, the favorable C-factor of class-II cavities may become unfavorable. This study investigated the application method on bulk-fill resin composite polymerization shrinkage.MethodsOccluso-proximal class-II cavities were prepared in 40 molars and bonded with a self-etch adhesive (Adhese Universal). The study groups varied according to the resin composite application: group-1: bulk application, Tetric EvoCeram Bulk Fill (TBF); group-2: proximal wall construction (TBF) and occlusal cavity filling (TBF); group-3: thin flowable liner layer, Tetric EvoFlow Bulk Fill (TEF) and bulk filling (TBF); group-4: flowable liner (TEF), proximal wall (TBF), occlusal cavity (TBF); and group-5: bulk application, SDR (3 mm) and capping layer (TBF, 1 mm). Each resin composite increment was scanned twice using micro-CT (uncured, cured 40 s) at a resolution of 16 µm. Shrinkage vectors and volumetric polymerization shrinkage were evaluated and statistically analyzed (one-way ANOVA). SEM images were used to investigate the tooth-restoration interface.ResultsShrinkage vectors differed significantly among the groups and were greatest in gp5-fl/SDR (47.6 µm), followed by gp1-TBF (23.8 µm) and least in gp5-fl/SDR+TBF (11.1 µm). Volumetric shrinkage varied significantly with the use of SDR (gp5-fl/SDR: 2.6%) and TEF (gp4-fl/TEF: 2.5%) to TBF (gp4-fl/TEF+wl/TBF: 0.6%) in the incremental application.SignificanceBuilding a proximal resin composite wall yielded smaller shrinkage vectors than the bulk application. Applying a thin flowable liner decreased the shrinkage vectors, even more when building a proximal wall. A thin flowable liner is recommended when building a proximal resin composite wall.     

Measurement of the full-field polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of dental composites using digital image correlation

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to measure the full-field polymerization shrinkage of dental composites using optical image correlation method.MethodsBar specimens of cross-section 4 mm × 2 mm and length 10 mm approximately were light cured with two irradiances, 450 mW/cm² and 180 mW/cm², respectively. The curing light was generated with Optilux 501 (Kerr) and the two different irradiances were achieved by adjusting the distance between the light tip and the specimen. A single-camera 2D measuring system was used to record the deformation of the composite specimen for 30 min at a frequency of 0.1 Hz. The specimen surface under observation was sprayed with paint to produce sufficient contrast to allow tracking of individual points on the surface. The curing light was applied to one end of the specimen for 40 s during which the painted surface was fully covered. After curing, the cover was removed immediately so that deformation of the painted surface could be recorded by the camera. The images were then analyzed with specialist software and the volumetric shrinkage determined along the beam length.ResultsA typical shrinkage strain field obtained on a specimen surface was highly non-uniform, even at positions of constant distance from the irradiation surface, indicating possible heterogeneity in material composition and shrinkage behavior in the composite. The maximum volumetric shrinkage strain of ～1.5% occurred at a subsurface distance of about 1 mm, instead of at the irradiation surface. After reaching its peak value, the shrinkage strain then gradually decreased with increasing distance along the beam length, before leveling off to a value of approximately 0.2% at a distance of 4–5 mm. The maximum volumetric shrinkage obtained agreed well with the value of 1.6% reported by the manufacturer for the composite examined in this work. Using irradiance of 180 mW/cm² resulted in only slightly less polymerization shrinkage than using irradiance of 450 mW/cm².SignificanceCompared to the other measurement methods, the image correlation method is capable of producing full-field information about the polymerization shrinkage behavior of dental composites.     

Alternative methods for determining shrinkage in restorative resin composites

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to evaluate polymerization shrinkage of resin composites using a coordinate measuring machine, optical coherence tomography and a more widely known method, such as Archimedes Principle. Two null hypothesis were tested: (1) there are no differences between the materials tested; (2) there are no differences between the methods used for polymerization shrinkage measurements.

Methods

Polymerization shrinkage of seven resin-based dental composites (Filtek Z250™, Filtek Z350™, Filtek P90™/3M ESPE, Esthet-X™, TPH Spectrum™/Dentsply 4 Seasons™, Tetric Ceram™/Ivoclar-Vivadent) was measured. For coordinate measuring machine measurements, composites were applied to a cylindrical Teflon mold (7 mm × 2 mm), polymerized and removed from the mold. The difference between the volume of the mold and the volume of the specimen was calculated as a percentage. Optical coherence tomography was also used for linear shrinkage evaluations. The thickness of the specimens was measured before and after photoactivation. Polymerization shrinkage was also measured using Archimedes Principle of buoyancy (n = 5). Statistical analysis of the data was performed with ANOVA and the Games-Howell test.

Results

The results show that polymerization shrinkage values vary with the method used. Despite numerical differences the ranking of the resins was very similar with Filtek P90 presenting the lowest shrinkage values.

Significance

Because of the variations in the results, reported values could only be used to compare materials within the same method. However, it is possible rank composites for polymerization shrinkage and to relate these data from different test methods. Independently of the method used, reduced polymerization shrinkage was found for silorane resin-based composite.     

Polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of packable composites.

OBJECTIVE: This investigation evaluated polymerization shrinkage and depth of cure of five packable composites. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Five materials were used for the investigation: Alert, Surefil, Solitaire, P60, and Prodigy Condensable. Groups of 10 specimens of each material were made measuring either 2 or 5 mm in thickness, mounted in a testing jig, and polymerized using a dental curing light. Linear shrinkage was recorded and converted to a volumetric value. To evaluate depth of cure, ten specimens of each material were fabricated in both 2- and 5-mm thicknesses, and a Knoop hardness number was recorded on the top and bottom surfaces 5 minutes after light curing. A one-way analysis of variance statistical test was used to determine if there was a significant difference among materials. A Tukey multiple comparison test was then used to determine where significant differences existed. RESULTS: The volumetric shrinkage for the 2-mm-thick specimens from highest shrinkage to lowest were: Solitaire (3.3%), Prodigy Condensable (1.8%), Surefil (1.4%), P60 (1.2%), and Alert (0.2%). The 5-mm-thick specimens were ranked as follows: Solitaire (2.1%), Prodigy Condensable (1.0%), P60 (0.9%), Surefil (0.8%), and Alert (0.3%). Hardness for the bottom surface of the 2-mm-thick specimens showed that P60 (48.5) and Alert (42.6) had the highest values. Solitaire (11.2) had a significantly lower value. Hardness for the bottom surface at 5-mm thickness showed Alert (16.5) and P60 (16.3) with higher values than Surefil (8.9). CONCLUSION: Solitaire had the most shrinkage and Alert the least at both 2- and 5-mm depths. Depth of cure was severely compromised for all materials at 5 mm.     

Method to measure the polymerization shrinkage of light-cured composites.

The polymerization shrinkage of light-cured dental composite resins has been reported to cause a marginal gap between the cavity wall and the restoration, leading to the premature and/or tensile stress failure of the composite restoration. This study measured the volumetric shrinkage of six light-cured posterior composites by measuring specific gravity differences between uncured and cured composite test specimens, using a modified version of ASTM method D792 "Specific Gravity and Density of Plastics by Displacement." The measured volumetric shrinkage ranged from 1.35% to 3.22%.     

Photoelastic determination of polymerization shrinkage stress in low-shrinkage resin composites

Low-shrinkage resin composites are in the focus of research in posterior resin composite restoratives. The aim of the study was to examine the polymerization shrinkage stress of new composites (Venus Diamond/ Heraeus Kulzer; SDR/DENTSPLY) and an experimental low-shrinkage resin composite (Ormocer/VOCO) in comparison to established low-shrinkage resin composites (Filtek Silorane/ 3M ESPE; els/Saremco; Filtek Supreme XT/3M ESPE; Clearfil Majesty Posterior/Kuraray). Cylindrical cavities (? 4 mm) in Araldit-B epoxy resin plates (40×40×4 mm) were pretreated with the Rocatec system to ensure bonding of the resin composites. The resin composite specimens (n = 10) were exposed to light for 60 s with a QTH curing device (Translux energy, Heraeus Kulzer, Germany). The samples were stored dark and dry (23 °C). Polymeri-zation shrinkage stress data (MPa) 4 min and 24 h post exposure were calculated based on the diameter of the first-order isochromatic rings, obtained from the Araldit plates. The statistical analysis of the obtained data was carried out with the Wilcoxon test (p = 0.05). After 24 h, the following mean stress values and standard deviations were obtained: Venus Diamond 3.4 ± 0.27 MPa; SDR 3.3 ± 0.26 MPa; exp. Ormocer 4.0 ± 0.18 MPa; Filtek Silorane 2.8 ± 0.19 MPa; els 2.5 ± 0.09 MPa; Filtek Supreme XT 6.0 ± 0.20 MPa; and Clearfil Majesty Posterior 5.6 ± 0.15 MPa. For all materials, higher polymerization stress values were recorded after 24 h. All differences in the shrinkage data obtained after 24 h were statistically significant (p < 0.05) except Venus Diamond/SDR. Venus Diamond, els and SDR showed shrinkage data closer to that of Filtek Silorane.     

Effect of the photo-activation method on polymerization shrinkage of restorative composites

This study measured the gap that resulted from polymerization shrinkage of seven restorative resin composites after curing by three different methods. Contraction behavior, according to the specimen region, was also characterized. The materials used for this study were Alert (Jeneric/Pentron, Wallingford, CT 06492, USA), Surefil (Dentsply Caulk, Milford, DE 19963, USA), P60 (3M Dental Products, St Paul, MN 55144, USA), Z250 (3M), Z100 (3M), Definite (Degussa-Hüls, Hanau, Germany) and Flow-it (Jeneric/Pentron). The composite was placed in a circular brass mold 7 mm in diameter and 2 mm in height. Photo-activation was performed by a) continuous light (500 mW/cm2) for 40 seconds; b) stepped light with low intensity (150 mW/cm2) for 10 seconds and high intensity (500 mW/cm2) for 30 seconds and c) intermittent light (450 mW/cm2) for 60 seconds. The top and bottom surfaces were then polished and after 24 +/- 1 hours, the contraction gap was measured by SEM at variable pressure (LEO 435 VP, Cambridge, England). Results were analyzed by ANOVA and the means compared by Tukey's test (5%). The results demonstrated 1) the continuous light method presented the greatest gap values (15.88 microm), while the other methods demonstrated lower polymerization shrinkage values (stepped light, 13.26 microm; intermittent light, 12.79 microm); 2) restorative composites shrunk more at the bottom surface (15.84 microm) than at the top surface (12.11 microm) and (3) the composites Alert (12.02 microm), Surefil (11.86 microm), Z250 (10.81 microm) and P60 (10.17 microm) presented the least contraction gaps, followed by Z100 (15.84 microm) and Definite (14.06 microm) and finally Flow-it (23.09 microm) low viscosity composite, which had the greatest mean value.     

Polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composites and filled adhesives.

OBJECTIVES: The magnitude and kinetics of polymerization shrinkage, together with elastic modulus, may be potential predictors of bond failure of adhesive restorations. This study examined these properties in visible-light-cured resins, in particular new flowable composites and filled adhesives. METHODS: Polymerization shrinkage values were obtained by digital video imaging before and after light-curing; shrinkage kinetics were obtained by the "deflecting disk" method and the elastic modulus by analysis of the fundamental period of vibration. RESULTS: Flowable composites generally showed higher shrinkage than traditional non-flowable composites, while more densely filled adhesives presented lower shrinkage than lightly filled or unfilled resins. The elastic moduli of flowable composites were in the low-medium range, whilst the hybrid composites showed the highest values and the microfilled the lowest. More densely filled adhesives were more rigid than lightly filled and unfilled adhesives. The kinetics behavior was material dependent, mainly characterized by the coefficient of near-linear contraction between 10 and 40% of the final shrinkage and the time to reach 75% of the final shrinkage. SIGNIFICANCE: The higher shrinkage of flowable composites over that of hybrids may indicate a potential for higher interfacial stresses. However, their lower rigidity may be a counteracting factor. The microfilled composite showed low shrinkage and low rigidity, a combination that may prove less damaging to the interface. As the kinetics parameters tended to be material specific, no specific class of materials should be seen as more stress inducing until studies determine the relative importance of each examined parameter. The performance of adhesive resins as stress buffers also remains unpredictable.