Zeynep Biçer

The aim of this in vitro study was to evaluate the color change of resin composites with different filler contents subjected to immersion in different solutions, brushing, and thermal aging procedures. A total of 320 samples were prepared using 4 different flowable and 4 different conventional resin composites (n = 40). The samples were separated into 4 subgroups according to the solution to be used (wine, coffee, tea, or distilled water) and then immersed in the solutions for 12 days. All samples were subjected to 10,000 cycles of brushing and 10,000 cycles of thermal cycling procedures. ∆E values were calculated according to CIEDE2000 and CIELab color systems. For statistical analysis, the 3-way analysis of variance, the Tukey test, and the intraclass correlation coefficient were used. The significance level was taken as P < 0.05. Mean color change values differed significantly according to the solution, type of resin composite, and their interactions (P < 0.001). The values of the highest color change were obtained in wine, according to solutions, and conventional according to type. The filler content, viscosity, solutions to which they are subjected and their interactions with each other are effective factors in the color stability of restorative materials. The most effective factor in the color change of resin composites was the solution.

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of aging and bleaching procedures on the color stability and surface roughness of single-shade composite resins and compare them with a multi-shade composite resin. Methods: Fifty composite resin specimens (n=10 per group) from five brands— Omnichroma (Tokuyama, Japan) (OMN), Zenchroma (President Dental, Germany) (ZNC), Charisma Diamond One (Kulzer, Germany) (CHR), Essentia Universal (GC Corporation, Japan) (ESU) and one multi-shade composite resin Filtek Z550 (3M ESPE, USA) (FLT), —were subjected to aging (1-year simulated staining and brushing) and bleaching procedures. Color measurements were taken at baseline, after aging, and after bleaching using a spectrophotometer, while surface roughness was measured using a contact mode profilometer. Data were analyzed using Generalized Linear Models and Tukey’s test for multiple comparison, with a significance level set at p

The temperature changes, chemical agents, and brushing activity that resin composite restorations are exposed to in the oral environment can cause changes in surface roughness. In this study, the aim was to investigate in vitro the clinical one-year surface roughness changes of different types of composites (flowable or conventional) from the same companies by subjecting them to immersion in solutions, brushing, and thermal cycling procedures to simulate intraoral conditions. Four different resin composite brands were included in the study using both their conventional (Charisma Smart, 3M Filtek Ultimate Universal, Omnichroma, Beautifil II) and flowable resin composites (Charisma Flow, 3M Filtek Ultimate Flowable, Omnichroma Flow, Beautifil Flow Plus F00), giving 4 groups with 2 types of resin composite in each. 40 samples were prepared for each group/resin type, for a total of 320 samples. After initial surface roughness measurements by a mechanical profilometer, the samples were divided into 4 subgroups (n = 10) and immersed in solutions (distilled water, tea, coffee, or wine) for 12 days. The samples were then subjected to 10,000 cycles of brushing simulation and 10,000 cycles of thermal aging. Surface roughness measurements were repeated after the procedures. For statistical analysis, the 3-way analysis of variance and the Tukey test were used (p < 0.05). It was concluded that composite groups and types had an effect on surface roughness at time t0 (p < 0.001). At time t1, the highest surface roughness value was obtained in the Beautifil-conventional interaction. When the surface roughness values between time t0 and t1 were compared, an increase was observed in the Beautifil II and Beautifil Flow Plus F00, while a decrease was observed in the other composite groups. Composite groups, types, and solutions had an effect on the surface roughness of resin composites. After aging procedures, it was concluded that the Beautifil group could not maintain the surface structure as it exceeded the threshold value of 0.2 μm for bacterial adhesion.