Biocompatibility and performance of new generation dental composites
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20243314Keywords:
Dental composites, Biocompatibility, Nanotechnology, Polymerization, Mechanical propertiesAbstract
Dental composites have undergone significant advancements in recent years, with new-generation materials being developed to improve both biocompatibility and mechanical performance. These innovations have led to the increased use of dental composites in restorative dentistry, particularly in both anterior and posterior restorations. Biocompatibility remains a key concern, as the release of unreacted monomers, such as bisphenol A glycidyl methacrylate (Bis-GMA), can cause local tissue irritation or systemic effects. Modern composites aim to reduce these risks by incorporating alternative resin systems and advanced photo initiators. Nanotechnology has further enhanced the performance of these materials by improving mechanical strength and wear resistance, but questions about the safety of nanoparticles and their long-term biological effects continue to be explored. In addition to biocompatibility, the mechanical properties of new-generation composites have been significantly optimized. The introduction of bulk-fill composites allows for deeper polymerization and faster placement, reducing clinical procedure times while maintaining high mechanical integrity. Polymerization shrinkage, a common issue in traditional composites, has been minimized in newer formulations, reducing the risk of marginal gaps and microleakage. The effectiveness of different light-curing units, such as light-emitting diode (LED) versus halogen lights, plays a crucial role in achieving optimal polymerization depth, especially in posterior restorations where light penetration can be limited. Long-term clinical outcomes depend on several factors, including material choice, placement technique, and patient adherence to oral hygiene. Despite the improvements in composite materials, the longevity of restorations still faces challenges such as wear, fracture, and degradation over time. Continued research into the safety, effectiveness, and clinical performance of new-generation composites is essential to ensuring patient safety and enhancing the durability of restorations in the future. These advancements promise to address many of the limitations seen in earlier dental materials while offering superior performance and patient satisfaction.
Metrics
References
Elfakhri F, Alkahtani R, Li C, Khaliq J. Influence of filler characteristics on the performance of dental composites: A comprehensive review. Ceram Int. 2022;48(19):27280-94.
Geurtsen W. Biocompatibility of dental casting alloys. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2002;13(1):71-84.
Ferracane JL. Resin composite—state of the art. Dent Mat. 2011;27(1):29-38.
Mitra SB, Wu D, Holmes BN. An application of nanotechnology in advanced dental materials. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134(10):1382-90.
Van Landuyt KL, Snauwaert J, De Munck J, Peumans M, Yoshida Y, Poitevin A, et al. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials. 2007;28(26):3757-85.
Izutani N, Imazato S, Nakajo K, Takahashi N, Takahashi Y, Ebisu S, et al. Effects of the antibacterial monomer 12‐methacryloyloxy-dodecylpyridinium bromide (MDPB) on bacterial viability and metabolism. Eur J Oral Sci. 2011;119(2):175-81.
Kamel M, Elsayed H, Abdalla A, Darrag A. The effect of water storage on micro-shear bond strength of contemporary composite resins using different dentin adhesive systems. Tanta Dent J. 2014;11(1):47-55.
Ilie N, Hickel R. Resin composite restorative materials. Aust Dent J. 2011;56:59-66.
Navimipour EJ, Azar FP, Keshipour S, Nadervand S. Thermal Stability and Monomer Elution of Bulk fill Composite resins cured from different irradiation distances. Front Dentistry. 2021;18.
Alrahlah A, Silikas N, Watts D. Post-cure depth of cure of bulk fill dental resin-composites. Dent Mat. 2014;30(2):149-54.
Polydorou O, König A, Hellwig E, Kümmerer K. Long‐term release of monomers from modern dental‐composite materials. Eur J Oral Sci. 2009;117(1):68-75.
Opdam NJ, Bronkhorst EM, Loomans BA, Huysmans M-CD. Longevity of repaired restorations: a practice based study. J Dentistry. 2012;40(10):829-35.
Schwendicke F, Göstemeyer G, Blunck U, Paris S, Hsu L-Y, Tu Y-K. Directly placed restorative materials: review and network meta-analysis. J Dent Res. 2016;95(6):613-22.
Price R, Felix CA, Andreou P. Evaluation of a dual peak third generation LED curing light. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2005;26(5):331-2.
Ilie N, Hickel R. Investigations on a methacrylate-based flowable composite based on the SDR™ technology. Dent Mat. 2011;27(4):348-55.
Hasanain FA, Nassar HM. Utilizing light cure units: A concise narrative review. Polymers. 2021;13(10):1596.
Rueggeberg F, Caughman WF, Curtis J. Effect of light intensity and exposure duration on cure of resin composite. Oper Dent. 1994;19:26.