Journal of Korean Dental Science

  • 제16권1호
  • /
  • Pages.74-79
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 2005-4742(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-7651(eISSN)
대한치의학회 (Korean Academy of Dental Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparative Analysis of Water Absorption and Water Solubility of Alkasite-based Restorative Material

  • Myeong-Gwan Jih (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Hye-Jin Cho (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Eu-Jin Cha (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University) ;
  • Tae-Young Park (Department of Conservative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Chosun University)
  • 투고 : 2023.01.19
  • 심사 : 2023.05.15
  • 발행 : 2023.06.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: Cention N (Ivoclar Vivadent) was a recently introduced alkasite-based restorative material that was expected to replace amalgam and glass ionomer cement. This material was an esthetic restoration with adequate mechanical strength and release of fluoride and calcium. The purpose of this study was to measure the water sorption and water solubility of Cention N and evaluate its long-term durability compared to other esthetic restorations (Resin-Modified Glass Ionomer cement [RMGIC], Giomer, Composite Resin). Materials and Methods: Twenty specimens each of Cention N (CN), Resin Modified-Glass Ionomer Cement (FJ), Giomer (BF), and Composite Resin (FZ) were made. After each specimen was completely dried in a desiccator for 24 hours using a vacuum pressure pump, the specimen was weighed (m1). After that, the specimen was immersed in distilled water at 37℃ for 7 days, stored in a drying oven, and weighed (m2). After drying completely for 24 hours in a desiccator, the specimen was weighed (m3) to calculate the water absorption and water solubility using Formulas 1 and 2. The measured values were statistically processed and analyzed using SPSS, and the significance level was set at 0.05. Result: When measuring water sorption, FJ (122.61 ㎍/mm3) showed significantly higher water sorption than CN (35.42 ㎍/mm3) (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between FZ (18.03 ㎍/mm3) and BF (14.76 ㎍/mm3) (P=0.930). When measuring water solubility, CN (6.65 ㎍/mm3) showed significantly higher water solubility than FJ (1.47 ㎍/mm3) (P<0.05). Conclusion: Cention N had lower water sorption than RMGIC, but higher water solubility, indicating that it is more vulnerable to moisture and has lessened long-term durability.

키워드

과제정보

This study was supported by a research fund from Chosun University, 2022.

참고문헌

  1. Naz F, Samad Khan A, Kader MA, Al Gelban LOS, Mousa NMA, Asiri RSH, Hakeem AS. Comparative evaluation of mechanical and physical properties of a new bulk-fill alkasite with conventional restorative materials. Saudi Dent J. 2021; 33: 666-73.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2020.04.012
  2. Prasada K, Vidhyadhara HT. Comparative evaluation of sorption and solubility of Amalgomer CR and Cention N restorative material- An in vitro study. Int J Dent Res. 2020; 5: 122-5.  https://doi.org/10.31254/dentistry.2020.5303
  3. Mohamed NI, Safy RK, Elezz AFA. Microtensile bond strength, marginal leakage, and antibacterial effect of bulk fill resin composite with alkaline fillers versus incremental nanohybrid composite resin. Eur J Dent. 2021; 15: 425-32.  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1721310
  4. Toledano M, Osorio R, Osorio E, Fuentes V, Prati C, Garcia-Godoy F. Sorption and solubility of resin-based restorative dental materials. J Dent. 2003; 31: 43-50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(02)00083-0
  5. Anusavice KJ, Phillips RW, Shen C, Rawls HR. Phillips' science of dental materials. 12th ed. St. Louis (MO): Elsevier; 2013. 
  6. Soderholm KJ. Degradation of glass filler in experimental composites. J Dent Res. 1981; 60: 1867-75.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345810600110701
  7. Lee K, Kim J, Shin J, Han M. Comparison of microhardness and compressive strength of alkasite and conventional restorative materials. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent. 2020; 47: 320-6.  https://doi.org/10.5933/JKAPD.2020.47.3.320
  8. Antice HM, Nicholson JW. Studies on the structure of light-cured Glass-ionomer cements. J Mater Sci. 1992: 3: 447-51.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00701241
  9. McCabe JF, Rusby S. Water absorption, dimensional change and radial pressure in resin matrix dental restorative materials. Biomaterials. 2004; 25: 4001-7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.10.088
  10. Um CM, Oilo G. The effect of early water contact on glass-ionomer cements. Quintessence Int. 1992; 23: 209-14. 
  11. Gladys S, Van Meerbeek B, Braem M, Lambrechts P, Vanherle G. Comparative physico-mechanical characterization of new hybrid restorative materials with conventional glass-ionomer and resin composite restorative materials. J Dent Res. 1997; 76: 883-94.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345970760041001
  12. Feilzer AJ, Kakaboura AI, de Gee AJ, Davidson CL. The influence of water sorption on the development of setting shrinkage stress in traditional and resin-modified glass ionomer cements. Dent Mater. 1995; 11: 186-90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0109-5641(95)80016-6
  13. Huang C, Tay FR, Cheung GS, Kei LH, Wei SH, Pashley DH. Hygroscopic expansion of a compomer and a composite on artificial gap reduction. J Dent. 2002; 30: 11-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-5712(01)00053-7