ABSTRACT
AIM: This study aimed to characterize the morphology of filler particles and to analyze the effect of shortened and extended photoactivation times on hardness (VHN) and cross-link density (CLD) of resin-based low-viscosity materials. METHODS: Sixteen commercially available materials were tested: four fissure sealants (Alpha Seal, Fluroshield Yellowed, Bioseal and Fluroshield White) and 12 flowable composites (Opallis T, Permaflo T, Opallis A2, Natural Flow A2, Master Flow A2, Permaflo A2, Filtek Z350 A2, Natural Flow O, Master Flow OA2, Opallis OA3.5, Filtek Z350 OA3, Opallis OP) at six curing times (10 s, 20 s, 30 s, 40 s, 50 s and 60 s). Specimens were fabricated (n = 5), analyzed by Scanning Electron Microscopy, by VHN and by CLD. RESULTS: Unimodal and multimodal filler particles sizes with spherical and irregular shapes were observed. Unfilled materials were also detected. There were no differences among curing times for either VHN or CLD. Opallis A2 and Opallis OA3.5 showed the highest VHN at all curing times, whereas Master Flow A2 and Master Flow OA2 presented the lowest VHN. Opallis A2 presented the highest CLD at all curing times and Alpha Seal showed the lowest CLD. CONCLUSIONS: Filler particle morphology differed among the resin-based low-viscosity materials tested. The shortest photoactivation time tested could yield similar VHN and CLD means to those provided by the most extended photoactivation time.
Subject(s)
Composite Resins/chemistry , Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives , Analysis of Variance , Cross-Linking Reagents , Hardness , Materials Testing , Microscopy, Electron, Scanning , Particle Size , Statistics, Nonparametric , Surface Properties , Time Factors , ViscosityABSTRACT
This study aimed to evaluate whether preheated resin-based flowable restoratives would show increased hardness and softening susceptibility after an early cariogenic challenge. Fluroshield- Yellowed, Bioseal, Wave, Master Flow, Fluroshield-White, Conseal F, Filtek Z350 Flow, and Opallis Flow were tested. Preheating was performed using a microwave device. Five specimens of each preheated or room temperature material (n = 5) were fabricated. Hardness was assessed before and after a cariogenic challenge. The analysis was done by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures (cariogenic challenge) and Tukey's test for multiple comparisons (
