Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics

  • 제33권1호
  • /
  • Pages.1-8
  • /
  • 2008
  • /
  • 2234-7658(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-7666(eISSN)
대한치과보존학회 (The Korean Academy of Conservative Dentistry)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

공초점 레이저 주사 현미경을 이용한 실험적 레진의 표면 조도에 대한 연구

SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF EXPERIMENTAL COMPOSITE RESINS USING CONFOCAL LASER SCANNING MICROSCOPE

  • 배지현 (분당 서울대학교병원 치과보존과) ;
  • 이미애 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실) ;
  • 조병훈 (서울대학교 치과대학 치과보존학교실)
  • Bae, J.H. (Department of Conservation Dentistry, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Lee, M.A. (Department of Conservation Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Cho, B.H. (Department of Conservation Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University)
  • 발행 : 2008.01.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 공초점 현미경을 이용하여 새로운 단량체와 filler의 크기, 연마방법이 실험용 복합레진의 표면조도에 미치는 영향을 연구하였다. 단점이 많은 희석재인 TEGDMA의 사용을 줄이기 위해, Bis-GMA의 유도체로서 중합수축이 적고 점도가 낮은 새로운 단량체인 methoxlyated Bis-GMA (Bis-M-CMA)를 첨가하고 다른 크기의 filer를 갖는 2종의 실험용 복합레진과 TEGDMA를 함유한 1종의 실험용 복합레진을 제작하였다. EX1; 실험용 복합레진 1 (Bis-M-GMA/TEGDMA = 95/5 wt%, 40 nm 나노필러 함유), EX2; 실험용 복합레진 2 (Bis-M-GMA/TEGDMA = 95/5wt%, 20 nm 나노필러 함유), EX3; 실험용 복합레진 3 (Bis-GMA/TEGDMA = 70/30 wt%, 40 nm 나노필러 함유). 테프론 몰드를 이용하여 지름 6 mm 두께 2 mm의 시편을 각 실험용 복합레진과 Filtek Z250으로 9개씩 만들고 3군으로 분류하였다. Mylar strip 군은 연마를 하지 않았고, Sof-lex군은 #1000 SiC paper로 연마한 뒤 501-lex disc로 연마하였다. Diapolisher 군은 #1000 SiC paper로 연마한 뒤 DiaPolisher polishing point로 연마하였다. 공초점 현미경을 이용하여 각 시편당 7군데에서 Rq (Root mean square roughness), Rv (Valley roughness), Rp (Peak roughness), Rc (2D Roughness), Sc (3D Roughness) 값을 측정하였고, Two-way ANOVA와 Tukey multiple comparisons test로 유의수준 0.05로 통계처리 하였다. 복합레진의 종류 (p < 0.001), 연마 방법 (p < 0.001)은 각각 모두 표면조도 값에 영향을 미치며, 복합레진의 종류와 연마 방법 간에는 교호 작용이 관찰되었다 (p < 0.001). 복합레진의 종류에 따른 표면조도는 EX2가 가장 거친 표면을 보였고, EX3이 가장 평활한 면을 형성하였으며 (p < 0.05). 연마 방법에서는 연마하지 않은 Mylar strip 군이 가장 평활한 면을 형성하였다 (p < 0.05). 본 연구 결과를 종합하여보면 연마하지 않고 Mylar strip하에서 복합레진이 중합된 경우 가장 낮은 표면조도와 평활한 표면을 보였으며, 새로운 레진 단량체인 Bis-M-GMA를 함유한 복합레진이 수복물의 표면조도 측면에서는 필러 크기에 관계없이 기존의 Bis-GMA/TEGDMA를 기질단량체로 사용하는 복합레진에 비교하여 우수하지 못한 것을 확인하였다.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a new resin monomer, filler size and polishing technique on the surface roughness of composite resin restorations using confocal laser scanning microscopy. By adding new methoxylated Bis-GMA (Bis-M-GMA, 2,2-bis[4-(2-methoxy-3-methacryloyloxy propoxy) phenyl] propane) having low viscosity, the content of TEGDMA might be decreased. Three experimental composite resins were made: EX1 (Bis-M-GMA/TEGDMA = 95/5 wt%, 40 nm nanofillers); EX2 (Bis-M-GMA/TEGDMA = 95/5 wt%, 20 nm nanofillers); EX3 (Bis-GMA/TEGDMA = 70/30 wt%, 40 nm nanofillers). Filtek Z250 was used as a reference. Nine specimens (6 mm in diameter and 2 mm in thickness) for each experimental composite resin and Filtek Z250 were fabricated in a teflon mold and assigned to three groups. In Mylar strip group, specimens were left undisturbed. In Sof-lex group, specimens were ground with #1000 SiC paper and polished with Sof-lex discs. In DiaPolisher group, specimens were ground with #1000 SiC paper and polished with DiaPolisher polishing points. The Ra (Average roughness), Rq (Root mean square roughness), Rv (Valley roughness), Rp (Peak roughness), Rc (2D roughness) and Sc (3D roughness) values were determined using confocal laser scanning microscopy. The data were statistically analyzed by Two-way ANOVA and Tukey multiple comparisons test (p = 0.05). The type of composite resin and polishing technique significantly affected the surface roughness of the composite resin restorations (p < 0.001). EX3 showed the smoothest surface compared to the other composite resins (p < 0.05). Mylar strip resulted in smoother surface than other polishing techniques (p < 0.05). Bis-M-GMA. a new resin monomer having low viscosity, might reduce the amount of diluent, but showed adverse effect on the surface roughness of composite resin restorations.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Lu H, Roeder LB, Powers JM. Effect of polishing systems on the surface roughness of microhybrid composites. J Esthet Restor Dent 15:297-304, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.2003.tb00300.x
  2. von Noort R, Davis LG. The surface finish of composite resin restorative materials. Br Dent J 10:360-364, 1984
  3. Toledano M, De La Torre FJ, Osorio R. Evaluation of two polishing methods for resin composites. Am J Dent 1994;7:328-330
  4. Chan KC, Fuller JL, Hormati AA. The ability of foods to stain two composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 43:542- 545, 1980 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(80)90328-5
  5. Bouvier D, Duprez JP, Lissac M. Comparative evaluation of polishing systems on the surface of three aesthetic materials. J Oral Rehabil 24:888-894, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2842.1997.00603.x
  6. Kaplan BA, Goldstein GR, Vijayaraghvan TV, Nelson IK. The effect of three polishing systems on the surface roughness of four hybrid composites; a profilometric and scanning electron microscopy study. J Prosthet Dent 76:34-38, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(96)90343-1
  7. Turssi CP, Saad JRC, Duarte SLL, Rodirigues AL. Composite surfaces after finishing and polishing techniques. Am J Dent 13:136-138, 2000
  8. Lee JY, Shin DH. Surface roughness of universal composites after polishing procedures. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 28:369-377, 2003 https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2003.28.5.369
  9. Fruits TJ, Miranda FJ, Coury TL. Effects of equivalent abrasive grit sizes utilizing differing polishing motions on selected restorative materials. Quintessence Int 27:279-285, 1996
  10. Roede LB, Tate WH, Powers JM. Effect of finishing and polishing procedures on the surface roughness of packable composites. Oper Dent 25:534-543, 2000
  11. Marigo L, Rizzi M, La Torre G, Rumi G. 3-D surface profile analysis: different finishing methods for resin composites. Oper Dent 26:562-568, 2001
  12. Terry DA. Direct applications of a nanocomposite resin system; part 1- the evolution of contemporary composite materials. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 16:417-422, 2004
  13. Kalachandra S, Sankarapandian M, Shobha HK, Taylor DF, McGrath JE. Influence of hydrogen bonding on properties of Bis-GMA analogs. J Mater Sci Mater Med 8:283-286, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018508227774
  14. Anseth KS, Newman SM, Bowman CN. Polymeric dental composites: properties and reaction behavior of multimethacrylate dental restorations. Adv Polym Sci 122:177-217, 1995
  15. Braden M. The formulation of composite filling materials. Oper Dent 3:97-102, 1978
  16. Kim JW, Kim LU, Kim CK, Cho BH, Kim OY. Characteristics of novel dental composites containing 2,2-bis[4-(2-methoxy-3-methacryloxy-propoxy) phenyl] propane as a base resin. Biomacromolecules 7:154-160, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1021/bm050491l
  17. Bae JH, Kim YK, Yoon PY, Lee MA, Cho BH. Effect of a new resin monomer on the microleakage of composite resin restorations. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 32:468-474, 2007 https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2007.32.5.469
  18. Gonza′lez-Cabezas C, Fontana M, Dunipace AJ, Li Y, Fischer GM, Proskin HM, Stookey GK. Measurement of enamel remineralization using microradiography and confocal microscopy. A correlational study. Caries Res 32:385-392, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1159/000016475
  19. Al-Nawas B, Grotz KA, Gotz H, Heinrich G, Rippin TG, Stender TE, Duschner H, Wagner W. Validation of three-dimensional surface characterising methods: scanning electron microscopy and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Scanning 23:227-231, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1002/sca.4950230401
  20. Al-Shammery HA, Bubb NL, Youngson CC, Fasbinder DJ, Wood DJ. The use of confocal microscopy to assess surface roughness of two milled CAD-CAM ceramics following two polishing techniques. Dent Mater 23:736-741, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2006.06.012
  21. Ross M, Romrell LJ, Kaye GI. Histology. A test and atlas. 3rd Ed., p12-13, Williams & Wikins, 1995
  22. Mohan B, Kandaswamy D. A confocal microscopic evaluation of resin-dentin interface using adhesive systems with three different solvents bonded to dry and moist dentin in vitro study. Quintessence Int 36:511-521, 2005
  23. Banerjee A, Boyde A. Autofluorescence and mineral content of carious dentine: scanning optical and backscattered electron microscopic studies. Caries Res 32:219-26, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1159/000016456
  24. Hachiya Y, Iwaku M, Hosoda H, Fusayama T. Relation of finish to discoloration of composite resins. J Prosthet Dent 53:811-814, 1984
  25. Okazaki M, Douglas WH. Comparison of surface layer properties of composite resin by ESCA, SEM and X-ray diffractiometry. Biomaterials 5:284-290, 1984 https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-9612(84)90074-7
  26. Lee IB, Lee JH, Cho BH, Son HH, Lee ST, Um CM. Rheological properties of resin composites according to the change of monomer and filler compositions. J Kor Acad Cons Dent 29:520-531, 2004 https://doi.org/10.5395/JKACD.2004.29.6.520
  27. Rong MZ, Zhang MQ, Pan SL, Friedrich K. Interfacial effects in polypropylene-silica nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 92:1771-1781, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1002/app.20139