Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Osmangazi University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
BMC Oral Health. 2024 Aug 2;24(1):876. doi: 10.1186/s12903-024-04669-w.
The temperature changes, chemical agents, and brushing activity that resin composite restorations are exposed to in the oral environment can cause changes in surface roughness. In this study, the aim was to investigate in vitro the clinical one-year surface roughness changes of different types of composites (flowable or conventional) from the same companies by subjecting them to immersion in solutions, brushing, and thermal cycling procedures to simulate intraoral conditions.
Four different resin composite brands were included in the study using both their conventional (Charisma Smart, 3M Filtek Ultimate Universal, Omnichroma, Beautifil II) and flowable resin composites (Charisma Flow, 3M Filtek Ultimate Flowable, Omnichroma Flow, Beautifil Flow Plus F00), giving 4 groups with 2 types of resin composite in each. 40 samples were prepared for each group/resin type, for a total of 320 samples. After initial surface roughness measurements by a mechanical profilometer, the samples were divided into 4 subgroups (n = 10) and immersed in solutions (distilled water, tea, coffee, or wine) for 12 days. The samples were then subjected to 10,000 cycles of brushing simulation and 10,000 cycles of thermal aging. Surface roughness measurements were repeated after the procedures. For statistical analysis, the 3-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test were used (p < 0.05).
It was concluded that composite groups and types had an effect on surface roughness at time t (p < 0.001). At time t, the highest surface roughness value was obtained in the Beautifil-conventional interaction. When the surface roughness values between time t and t were compared, an increase was observed in the Beautifil II and Beautifil Flow Plus F00, while a decrease was observed in the other composite groups.
Composite groups, types, and solutions had an effect on the surface roughness of resin composites. After aging procedures, it was concluded that the Beautifil group could not maintain the surface structure as it exceeded the threshold value of 0.2 μm for bacterial adhesion.
树脂复合材料在口腔环境中所经受的温度变化、化学试剂以及刷牙活动会导致其表面粗糙度发生变化。本研究旨在通过将不同类型（流动型或传统型）的复合材料（来自同一家公司的 Charisma Smart、3M Filtek Ultimate Universal、Omnichroma、Beautifil II 以及 Charisma Flow、3M Filtek Ultimate Flowable、Omnichroma Flow、Beautifil Flow Plus F00）浸泡在溶液中、刷牙和热循环处理中，以模拟口腔内的情况，来研究临床一年内不同类型（流动型或传统型）的复合材料的表面粗糙度变化。
本研究共纳入了四种不同的树脂复合材料品牌，包括传统型（Charisma Smart、3M Filtek Ultimate Universal、Omnichroma、Beautifil II）和流动型（Charisma Flow、3M Filtek Ultimate Flowable、Omnichroma Flow、Beautifil Flow Plus F00）树脂复合材料，每种类型均有两种。每个组/树脂类型制备 40 个样本，总计 320 个样本。通过机械轮廓仪进行初始表面粗糙度测量后，将样本分为 4 个亚组（n=10），并将其分别浸泡在蒸馏水中、茶、咖啡或酒中 12 天。然后，对样本进行 10,000 次刷牙模拟循环和 10,000 次热老化循环。在完成这些程序后，重复进行表面粗糙度测量。对于统计分析，使用了三因素方差分析和 Tukey 检验（p<0.05）。
研究得出，复合材料组和类型对 t 时刻的表面粗糙度有影响（p<0.001）。在 t 时刻，Beautifil-传统型相互作用的表面粗糙度值最高。当比较 t 时刻和 t 时刻之间的表面粗糙度值时，Beautifil II 和 Beautifil Flow Plus F00 的表面粗糙度值增加，而其他复合树脂组的表面粗糙度值则减少。
复合材料组、类型和溶液对树脂复合材料的表面粗糙度有影响。经过老化程序后，Beautifil 组的表面结构无法维持，因为其表面粗糙度超过了 0.2μm，这是细菌黏附的临界值。
