Ads
related to: composite resin vs amalgam
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Dental composite resins (better referred to as "resin-based composites" or simply "filled resins") are dental cements made of synthetic resins. Synthetic resins evolved as restorative materials since they were insoluble, of good tooth-like appearance, insensitive to dehydration, easy to manipulate and inexpensive.
Composite resin fillings (also called white fillings) are a mixture of nanoparticles [19] [20] [21] or powdered glass and plastic resin, and can be made to resemble the appearance of the natural tooth. Although cosmetically superior to amalgam fillings, composite resin fillings are usually more expensive.
Composite fillings shrink with age and may pull away from the tooth allowing leakage. If leakage is not noticed early, recurrent decay may occur. A 2003 study showed that fillings have a finite lifespan: an average of 12.8 years for amalgam and 7.8 years for composite resins. [20]
Historically, zinc phosphate and polycarboxylate cements were used for this technique; however, since the mid-1980s composite resins have been the material of choice due to their adhesive properties. Common resin cements utilised for bonded amalgams are RMGIC and dual-cure resin based composite. [3]
Until the 1980s, most amalgam restorations placed worldwide were done without adhesives, although in the 1970s a polycarboxylate-based adhesive liner was formulated specifically for this purpose [35] In the mid-1980s the first reports of the use of resins to bond amalgam to etched tooth structure, much like is done for composite resins ...
Towards the GIC end of the spectrum, there is increasing fluoride release and increasing acid-base content; towards the composite resin end of the spectrum, there is increasing light cure percentage and increased flexural strength. Dental compomers, also known as polyacid-modified resin composite, are used in dentistry as a filling material.
Amalgam possesses greater longevity when compared to other direct restorative materials, such as composite. However, this difference has decreased with continual development of composite resins. Amalgam is typically compared to resin-based composites because many applications are similar and many physical properties and costs are comparable.
Opposed to this, direct composite filling pastes shrink a few percent in volume during hardening. This can lead to shrinkage stress and rarely to marginal gaps and failure. Although improvements of the composite resins could be achieved in the last years, solid inlays do exclude this problem. [3]