File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105025
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85192438251
- PMID: 38697507
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: The mechanical, wear, antibacterial properties and biocompatibility of injectable restorative materials under wet challenge
Title | The mechanical, wear, antibacterial properties and biocompatibility of injectable restorative materials under wet challenge |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Antibacterial behaviour Biocompatibility Injectable composite resin Mechanical properties Three-body wear |
Issue Date | 2024 |
Citation | Journal of Dentistry, 2024, v. 146, article no. 105025 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objectives: To evaluate the mechanical, wear, antibacterial properties, and biocompatibility of injectable composite materials. Methods: Two injectable composite resins (GU and BI), one flowable composite resin (FS), and one flowable compomer (DF), in A2 shade, were tested. Mechanical properties were tested via three-point bending test immediately after preparation and after 1-day, 7-day, 14-day, and 30-day water storage. Under water-PMMA slurry immersion, specimens were subjected to a 3-body wear test (10,000 cycles) against stainless steel balls, while the roughness, wear depth, and volume loss were recorded. After 1-day and 3-day MC3T3-E1 cell culture, cell viability was evaluated with CCK-8 test kits, while the cell morphology was observed under CLSM and SEM. Antibacterial properties on S. mutans were assessed via CFU counting, CLSM, and SEM observation. SPSS 26.0 was used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Results: The mechanical properties were material-dependent and sensitive to water storage. Flexural strength ranked GU > FS > BI > DF at all testing levels. Three nanocomposites had better wear properties than DF. No significant difference on 1-day cell viability was found, but DF showed significantly lower cell proliferation than nanocomposites on 3-day assessment. GU and FS had more favourable cell adhesion and morphology. CFU counting revealed no significant difference, while FS presented a slightly thicker biofilm and BI showed relatively lower bacteria density. Conclusions: Injectable nanocomposites outperformed the compomer regarding mechanical properties, wear resistance, and biocompatibility. The tested materials presented comparable antibacterial behaviours. Flowable resin-based composites’ performances are affected by multiple factors, and their compositions can be attributed. Clinical Significance: A profound understanding of the mechanical, wear, and biological properties of the restorative material is imperative for the clinical success of dental restorations. The current study demonstrated superior properties of highly filled injectable composite resins, which imply their wider indications and better long-term clinical performances. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/345799 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 4.8 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.313 |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Chen, Yanning | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bai, Xuedong | - |
dc.contributor.author | Xu, Mengxiao | - |
dc.contributor.author | Zhou, Tianyu | - |
dc.contributor.author | Loh, Yee Man | - |
dc.contributor.author | Wang, Chunjin | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pow, Edmond Ho Nang | - |
dc.contributor.author | Tsoi, James Kit Hon | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-08-28T07:52:11Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-08-28T07:52:11Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Journal of Dentistry, 2024, v. 146, article no. 105025 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0300-5712 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/345799 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: To evaluate the mechanical, wear, antibacterial properties, and biocompatibility of injectable composite materials. Methods: Two injectable composite resins (GU and BI), one flowable composite resin (FS), and one flowable compomer (DF), in A2 shade, were tested. Mechanical properties were tested via three-point bending test immediately after preparation and after 1-day, 7-day, 14-day, and 30-day water storage. Under water-PMMA slurry immersion, specimens were subjected to a 3-body wear test (10,000 cycles) against stainless steel balls, while the roughness, wear depth, and volume loss were recorded. After 1-day and 3-day MC3T3-E1 cell culture, cell viability was evaluated with CCK-8 test kits, while the cell morphology was observed under CLSM and SEM. Antibacterial properties on S. mutans were assessed via CFU counting, CLSM, and SEM observation. SPSS 26.0 was used for statistical analysis (α = 0.05). Results: The mechanical properties were material-dependent and sensitive to water storage. Flexural strength ranked GU > FS > BI > DF at all testing levels. Three nanocomposites had better wear properties than DF. No significant difference on 1-day cell viability was found, but DF showed significantly lower cell proliferation than nanocomposites on 3-day assessment. GU and FS had more favourable cell adhesion and morphology. CFU counting revealed no significant difference, while FS presented a slightly thicker biofilm and BI showed relatively lower bacteria density. Conclusions: Injectable nanocomposites outperformed the compomer regarding mechanical properties, wear resistance, and biocompatibility. The tested materials presented comparable antibacterial behaviours. Flowable resin-based composites’ performances are affected by multiple factors, and their compositions can be attributed. Clinical Significance: A profound understanding of the mechanical, wear, and biological properties of the restorative material is imperative for the clinical success of dental restorations. The current study demonstrated superior properties of highly filled injectable composite resins, which imply their wider indications and better long-term clinical performances. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of Dentistry | - |
dc.subject | Antibacterial behaviour | - |
dc.subject | Biocompatibility | - |
dc.subject | Injectable composite resin | - |
dc.subject | Mechanical properties | - |
dc.subject | Three-body wear | - |
dc.title | The mechanical, wear, antibacterial properties and biocompatibility of injectable restorative materials under wet challenge | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105025 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 38697507 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85192438251 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 146 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | article no. 105025 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | article no. 105025 | - |