The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 17 , ISSUE 2 ( February, 2016 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Radiopacity of 28 Composite Resins for Teeth Restorations

Ricardo Raitz, Patrizia Dubinskas Moruzzi, Glauco Vieira, Marlene Fenyo-Pereira

Citation Information : Raitz R, Moruzzi PD, Vieira G, Fenyo-Pereira M. Radiopacity of 28 Composite Resins for Teeth Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016; 17 (2):136-142.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1816

Published Online: 01-02-2016

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2016; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


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.

How to cite this article

Raitz R, Moruzzi PD, Vieira G, Fenyo- Pereira M. Radiopacity of 28 Composite Resins for Teeth Restorations. J Contemp Dent Pract 2016;17(2):136-142.


PDF Share
  1. An investigation of radiopacity of composite restorative materials. Aust Dent J 1981;26(2):105-112.
  2. Radiopacity of glass ionomer dental materials. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1990 Aug;70(2):231-235.
  3. Resin-based composites. J Am Dent Assoc 2003 Apr;134(4):510-512.
  4. ISO 4049 dentistry-polymer-based filling, restorative and luting material. 3rd ed. Geneva: International Organization for Standardization; 2000. p. 3-5.
  5. Radiopacity of light-cured posterior composite resins. J Am Dent Assoc 1987 Nov;115(5):722-724.
  6. The radiographic density of composite restorative resins. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1990 Aug;70(2):226-230.
  7. Radiopacity of restorative materials using digital images. J Appl Oral Sci 2006 Apr;14(2):147-152.
  8. Comparative radiopacity of six flowable resin composites. Oper Dent 2010 Jul-Aug;35(4):436-440.
  9. Radiopacity of posterior composites. J Dent 1986 Aug;14(4):178-179.
  10. The optimum level of radiopacity in posterior composite resins. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1989 Feb;18(1):19-21.
  11. Radiopacity of posterior composite resins, composite resin luting cements and glass ionomer lining cements. J Prosthet Dent 1993 Oct;70(4):351-355.
  12. Radiographic detection of recurrent carious lesion associated with composite restorations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1990 Aug;70(2):236-239.
  13. Radiopacity of composite restorative materials. Br Dent J 1979 Oct2;147(7): 187-189.
  14. A new technique for measuring the radiopacity of natural tooth substance and restorative materials. J Oral Rehabil 1987 May;14(3):267-269.
  15. Characterization of aluminium radiopacity standards for restorative materials. J Dent 1987 Aug;15(4):175-177.
  16. Influence of materials radiopacity in the radiographic diagnosis of secondary caries: evaluation in film and two digital systems. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2011 Sep;40(6):344-350.
  17. The effect of lesion size, restorative material and film speed on the detection of recurrent caries. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1989 Aug;68(2):232-237.
  18. A study on the radiopacity of different shades of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative materials. Oper Dent 1998 Jan-Feb;23(1):10-14.
  19. Radiopacity of resin-modified glass-ionomer restorative cements. Quintessence Int 1996 Sep;27(9):639-643.
  20. An evaluation of the radiopacity of composite restorative material used in class I and II cavities. Acta Odontol Scand 1989 Dec;47(6):401-407.
  21. Radiopacity of direct ceramic inlay restoratives. J Dent 1991 Dec;19(6):366-368.
  22. Radiopacity of composites with human enamel and dentine. J Dent 1991 Dec;19(6):362-365.
  23. Radiopacity of 12 visible-light-cured dental composite resins. J Oral Rehabil 1993 Nov;20:623-625.
  24. Radiopacity of compomers, flowable and conventional resin composites for posterior restorations. Oper Dent 1999 Jan-Feb;24(1):20-25.
  25. Comparative radiopacity of flowable resin composites. Quintessence Int 1999 Mar;30(3):179-184.
  26. Radiopacity of glassionomer/ composite resin hybrid materials. Braz Dent J 2001;12(2):85-89.
  27. Chicago: American Dental Association, Council on Scientific Affairs; 1993.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.