Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Contemp Dent Pract. 2016 Feb 1;17(2):136-42.

Radiopacity of 28 Composite Resins for Teeth Restorations.

Author information

1
Professor, Department of Oral Pathology, Oral Diagnosis and Oral Radiology, Sao Leopoldo Mandic Research Center, Sao Paulo, Brazil, Phone: +551136735270, e-mail: ricardoraitz@ig.com.br.
2
Department of Radiology, School of Dentistry, Braz Cubas University, Mogi das Cruzes, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
3
Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry University of Sao Paulo (FOUSP), Sao Paulo, Brazil.
4
Department of Stomatology, School of Dentistry, University of Sao Paulo (FOUSP), Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Abstract

AIM:

Radiopacity is a fundamental requisite to check marginal adaptation of restorations. Our objective was to assess the radiopacity of 28 brands of light-cured composite resins and compare their radiopacity with that of enamel, dentin, and aluminum of equivalent thickness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Composite resin disks (0.2, 0.5, and 1 mm) were radiographed by the digital method, together with an aluminum penetrometer and a human tooth equivalent tooth section. The degree of radiopacity of each image was quantified using digital image processing. Wilcoxon nonparametric test was used for comparison of the mean thickness of each material.

RESULTS:

All of the materials tested had an equal or greater radiopacity than that of aluminum of equivalent thickness. Similar results for enamel were found with the exception of Durafill, which was less radiopaque than enamel (p < 0.05). All the specimens were more radiopaque than dentin, except for P90 (which was equally radiopaque) and Durafill (which was less radiopaque). The thickness of the specimens may influence the similarity to the enamel's radiopacity. All of the composite resins comply with specification #27 of the American Dental Association. The radiopacity of Amelogen Plus, Aph, Brilhiante, Charisma, Concept Advanced, Evolux X, Exthet X, Inten S, Llis, Master Fill, Natural Look, Opallis, P60, Tetric, Tph, Z100, and Z250 was significantly higher than that of enamel (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

With these composites, it is possible to observe the boundaries between restoration and tooth structure, thus allowing clinicians to establish the presence of microleakage or restoration gap.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:

Suitable radiopacity is an essential requisite for good-quality esthetic restorative materials. We demonstrate that only some composites have the sufficient radiopacity to observe the boundaries between restoration and tooth structure, which is the main cause of restoration failure.

KEYWORDS:

Composite resins; Digital radiography; Image processing.

PMID:
27207002
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Loading ...
Support Center