WEAR AND CHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF ESTHETIC RESTORATIVE MATERIALS

,; ,; ,; ,

Journal of the Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry 2004;31(2):190-201.
Published online May 31, 2004.

WEAR AND CHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF ESTHETIC RESTORATIVE MATERIALS

¹
²

심미수복 재료의 마모와 화학적 분해

양규호¹, 최남기¹, 김훈주¹, 김선미²

¹전남대학교 치과대학 소아치과학교실 및 치의학 연구소
²광주보건대학 치위생과

Correspondence: ,

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the resistance to degradation and to compare the wear resistance characteristics of four esthetic restorative materials in an alkaline solution. The brands studied were Charmfil, Charmfil flow(composite resin), Compoglass F and PrimaFlow(compomer). The results were as follows: 1. The mass loss were not significantly different among the materials(p>0.05). 2. The sequence of the degree of degradation layer depth was in descending order by Compoglass F, PrimaFlow, Charmfil, and Charmfil flow. There were significant differences between Compoglass F and the others(p<0.05). 3. The sequence of the Si loss was in descending order by Charmfil flow, Charmfil, PrimaFlow, and Compoglass F. There were significant differences among these materials(p<0.05). 4. When observed with SEM, destruction of bonding between matrix and filler was observed and when observed with CLSM, the depth of degradation layer of specimen surface was observed. 5. The sequence of maximum wear depth was in descending order by Comfoglass, PrimaFlow Charmal, and Charmfil flow. There were significant differences among these materials(p<0.05). 6. The correlation coefficient between Si loss and degradation layer depth (r=0.602, p<0.05) Vicker's hardness number and maximum wear depth (r=0.501, p<0.05) were relatively high. These results indicate that wear and hydrolytic degradation may be considered to be evaluation factors of composite resins and compomers.

Key Words: Esthetic restorative materials, Wear, Chemical degradation