Resin composite restorations exhibit dimensional changes in the oral environment due to polymerization reaction and/or water sorption, which generates stresses in the surrounding tooth structures. The state of stress may differ between self-adhesive resin composites (SARCs) and conventional resin composites because only SARCs contain hydrophilic monomers.
Objective
The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of water sorption on polymerization stresses of SARCs.
Methods
Cracks were introduced near a cylindrical hole in a glass disk, and their lengths were measured. The hole was filled with the composites. The crack lengths were repeatedly measured during 1-week water storage 37°C. Stresses at the composite-glass interface were calculated from the crack lengths and fracture toughness of the glass. Flexural moduli, water sorption and solubility of composites were also measured.
Results
Polymerization stresses of SARCs were equivalent to or less than that of a conventional composite generating relatively little stress. Significant reduction of stress occurred between 1-h and 1-day water storage in all composites. This reduction tended to be more noticeable with a larger decrease in modulus and/or larger water sorption.
Conclusions
Quicker and/or larger stress reduction were considered to be beneficial for the longevity of SARC restorations.
TsuchiyaHTsubotaKIwasaM, et al.Influence of adhesive application time on enamel bond strength of single-step self-etch adhesive systems. Oper Dent2010; 35: 77–83.
2.
FuJSaikaewPKawanoS, et al.Effect of air-blowing duration on the bond strength of current one-step adhesives to dentin. Dent Mater2017; 33: 895–903.
3.
WeiYSilikasNZhangZ, et al.Diffusion and concurrent solubility of self-adhering and new resin-matrix composites during water sorption/desorption cycles. Dent Mater2011; 27: 197–205.
4.
WeiYSilikasNZhangZ, et al.Hygroscopic dimensional changes of self-adhering and new resin-matrix composites during water sorption/desorption cycles. Dent Mater2011; 27: 259–266.
5.
SalernoMDerchiGThoratS, et al.Surface morphology and mechanical properties of new-generation flowable resin composites for dental restoration. Dent Mater2011; 27: 1221–1228.
6.
PoitevinADe MunckJVan EndeA, et al.Bonding effectiveness of self-adhesive composites to dentin and enamel. Dent Mater2013; 29: 221–230.
7.
PetersonJRizkMHochM, et al.Bonding performance of self-adhesive flowable composites to enamel, dentin and a nano-hybrid composite. Odontology2018; 106: 171–180.
8.
PoorzandpoushKShahrabiMHeidariA, et al.Shear bond strength of self-adhesive flowable composite, conventional flowable composite and resin-modified glass ionomer cement to primary dentin. Front Dent2019; 16: 62–68.
9.
HiltonTJBroomeJC. Disadvantages of resin composite as a posterior restorative material, fundamentals of operative dentistry: a contemporary approach. 3th ed. Hanover Park: quintessence, 2006, pp.293–294.
10.
ChoiKKCondonJRFerracaneJL. The effects of adhesive thickness on polymerization contraction stress of composite. J Dent Res2000; 79: 812–817.
11.
SaitoWYamamotoTHanabusaM, et al.Do self-etch adhesives buffer polymerization stresses of resin composites?Adhes Dent2016; 34: 150–160.
12.
FeilzerAJde GeeAJDavidsonCL. Relaxation of polymerization contraction shear stress by hygroscopic expansion. J Dent Res1990; 69: 36–39.
13.
VersluisATantbirojnDLeeMS, et al.Can hygroscopic expansion compensate polymerization shrinkage? Part I. Deformation of restored teeth. Dent Mater2011; 27: 126–133.
14.
SuiterEAWatsonLETantbirojnD, et al.Effective expansion: balance between shrinkage and hygroscopic expansion. J Dent Res2016; 95: 543–549.
15.
ParkJWFerracaneJL. Water aging reverses residual stresses in hydrophilic dental composites. J Dent Res2017; 93: 195–200.
16.
SokolowskiGSzczesioABociongK, et al.Dental resin cements–The influence of water sorption on contraction stress changes and hydroscopic expansion. Materials (Basel)2018; 11: 973.
17.
KimuraSIharaKNohiraH, et al.Changes of residual stresses on the surface of leucite-reinforced ceramic restoration luted with resin composite cements during aging in water. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2021; 123: 104711.
18.
AizawaDHanabusaMHayakawaT, et al.Residual stresses in glass crowns generated by polymerization and water sorption of resin cements. Dent Mater J2024; 43: 460–468.
19.
MarshallDBLawnBR. An indentation technique for measuring stresses in tempered glass surfaces. J Am Ceram Soc1977; 60: 86–87.
20.
JSMS-SD-4-01. Residual stress measurement for engineering ceramics by indentation fracture method. Kyoto, Japan: The Society of Material Science Japan (JSMS) Committee on Fatigue of Materials, 2001.
21.
YamamotoTFerracaneJLSakaguchiRL, et al.Calculation of contraction stresses in dental composites by analysis of crack propagation in the matrix surrounding a cavity. Dent Mater2009; 25: 543–550.
22.
YamamotoTHanabusaMKimuraS, et al.Changes in polymerization stress and elastic modulus of bulk-fill resin composites for 24 h after irradiation. Dent Mater J2018; 37: 87–94.
23.
YamamotoTKubotaYMomoiY, et al.Polymerization stresses in low-shrinkage dental resin composites measured by crack analysis. Dent Mater2012; 28: e143–e149.
24.
FeilzerAJde GeeAJDavidsonCL. Setting stress in composite resin in relation to configuration of the restoration. J Dent Res1987; 66: 1636–1639.
25.
ChantikulPAnstisGRLawnBR, et al.A critical evaluation of indentation techniques for measuring fracture toughness: iI, strength method. J Am Ceram Soc1981; 64: 539–543.
26.
YoungWCBudynasRG. Shells of revolution; pressure vessels; pipes. In: YoungWCBudynasRG (eds) Roark’s formulas for stress and strain. 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2001, pp.683.
27.
YamamotoTHanabusaMMomoiY, et al.Polymerization stress of dental resin composite continues to develop 12 h after irradiation. J Esthet Restor Dent2015; 27: 44–54.
28.
BociongKSzczesioASokolowskiK, et al.The influence of water sorption of dental light-cured composites on shrinkage stress. Materials (Basel)2017; 10: 1142.
29.
FerracaneJL. Hygroscopic and hydrolytic effects in dental polymer networks. Dent Mater2006; 22: 211–222.
30.
VrochariADEliadesGHellwigE, et al.Curing efficiency of four self-etching, self-adhesive resin cements. Dent Mater2009; 25: 1104–1108.
31.
FerreiraMNSantosMNDFernandesI, et al.Effect of varying functional monomers in experimental self-adhesive composites: polymerization kinetics, cell metabolism influence and sealing ability. Biomed Mater2023; 18: 065014.
32.
SoderholmKJ. Leaking of fillers in dental composites. J Dent Res1983; 62: 126–130.
33.
NakanoELde SauzaASCBoaroLCC, et al.Polymerization stress and gap formation of self-adhesive, bulk-fill and flowable composite resins. Oper Dent2020; 45: E308–E316.
34.
BrewsterJRobertsHW. 12-month flexural mechanical properties of conventional and self-adhesive flowable resin composite materials. Dent Mater J2023; 42: 598–609.
35.
OhmoriKTasakiTKimuraS, et al.Residual polymerization stresses in human premolars generated with class II composite restorations. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2020; 104: 103643.
