Page 1

COMPOSITE RESIN INTRODUCTION: Although restorative dentistry is still concerned with the same treatment area as it was 20 yrs before; with the advent of some new materials and techniques it has changed the concept. Materials – properties – bond well - esthetic -

Functionally durable




Easy to manipulate



Composites are resin restorative materials having such physical structure as they are – -





nsensitive to dehydration


easy to manipulate

DEFINITIONS: Skinner: A compound of two or more distinctly different materials with properties that is superior to the individual constituents. Philips and Lutz: A three dimensional combination of at least two chemically different materials with a distinct interface.


McCabe: A product, which consists of at least two distinct phases normally formed by blending together the components having different structures and properties.

HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT: • 1940’s & 1950’s  Partially successful • Tooth like appearance Insolubility in oral fluids Polymerization shrinkage High coefficient of thermal expansion Clinical deficiencies and premature failure Inert filler particles were added to reduce the volume of the resinous compound

Bunocore 1955: Acid Etching Technique R.L. Bowen 1962: Development of modern composite  Experimenting on reinforcing epoxy resin with filler particles Main






methacrylate [BisGMA] Use of saline to coat filler particles that would bond chemically to the resin.

COMPOSITION AND ROLE OF ITS CONSTITUENTS: • Organic resin matrix • Inorganic filler particles 2

• A coupling agent • Activator-initiator system • Inhibitors • Colouring pigments Resin Matrix: Methacrylate – high polymerization shrinkage - higher co-efficient for thermal expansion Bowen – Bis-GMA resin matrix  Di-methacrylate  increased higher molecular water  * Extensive cross linking * Improvements in the properties of polymer Filler Particles: • Increased proportion of the matrix • Resin matrix is decreased  Polymerization shrinkage is less • H2O sorption and co-efficient of T.E. is less • Mechanical properties Types: Conventional Latest


Coupling Agent: Resin (flexible)

Coupling Agent Transfer stresses

Filler (stiffer)

- Improves properties e.g.

Titanates Zirconium Organosilanes

Activator – Initiator System: Methacrylate and dimethacrylate

Addition Polymerize Free radicals

Chemical 2 paste  Initiator – benzoyl peroxide  Activator – N, N dimethyl toluidine Both mixed together and addition polymerization reaction is initiated Light/heat: - First light activated system  U.V. light Replaced Visible light - Greater improved ability to polymerize increments up to 2mm - Single paste photo initiator

- Camphor quinone - Amine accelerators - Diphen amino ethyl methacrylate

- When left unexposed to light  do not react


Exposure to correct wavelength  Elicited photo initiation  Interaction of amines to form free radicals Inhibitors: -

Minimize/ prevent spontaneous polymerization of monomer


Free radical formed inhibits chain propagation


Butylated hydroxytoluine (0.01 wt%)

Optical Modifiers: -

Match appearance of teeth  Translucency


Shading  Pigments  Metal oxide


Opacity titanium dioxide

CLASSIFICATIONS: 1. Skinner: Traditional or conventional:

8-12 µm

Small particle filler:

1-5 µm





2. Philips & Lutz: Mean particle size of the filler Traditional:

5.30 µm; 1.5 µm]


1.5µm; 0.1µm 5

Homogenous microfilled: 0.05 – 0.1 µm Heterogenous microfilled: 0.05 – 1; 1-2 µm 3. Based on Inorganic Loading: Heavy filled materials:


Lightly filled materials:


According to Bayne and Heyman: Megafill

Large individual filler particles (range)






0.1 – 1µ


0.04 – 0.4µ


0.005 – 0.01 µ

Hybrid: Composite with a mixed range of particles sizes are called hybrid; and the largest particle size in that is used to define the hybrid type. • If composites  filler + uncured matrix (homogenous) • Pre-cured or unusual filler (heterogeneous)

Indications: -

Restoration of cavities


Core build-ups


Pit and fissure sealant


Esthetic enhancement procedure’s 6


Periodontal splitting


Orthodontic bonding

Contraindication: -

Operating site cannot be isolated


High caries index


If all of the occlusion is on the restoration


Deep subgingival areas


Parafunctional habit

Traditional Composites: -

Rough surface






Poor resistance to occlusal wear

Microfilled Composites: -

Colloidal silica particles


0.04 µm; 2-3 hundred times smaller


To increase filler loading  Colloidal silica sintered  Particles several tenth of micron obtained

Properties: -

Low tensile strength


Smoother and esthetic surface



Silica filler is removed along with embedded resin during finishing

Clinical Considerations: -

Stress bearing situations and sites potential chipping


Resin of choice of anterior teeth

Small Particle Filled Composite: Developed to achieve smooth surface  Improve properties  Inorganic filler are grounded to a size smaller than used for traditional composites Average filer: 1-5µm Used quartz: Glasses that contain heavy metals Properties: -

Tensile strength is double than traditional


Co-efficient of thermal expansion is less


Surface smoothness is improved


Polymerization shrinkage is less

Clinical Consideration: -

Improved strength  large stress and abrasion


Smooth surface for anterior application


Hybrid Composites: -

Developed to obtain smoother surface


Consist of colloidal silica ground particles of glass with metals 75-80% - filler content


Average particle size 0.6 – 1.0µm


Physical and mechanical properties range between traditional and small particle; generally superior to microfill.

Clinical Consideration: Surface smoothness + Reasonably good strength – Widely used Posterior Composites: [Packable] -

Recent years widespread demand


Number of advantages associated with them Thermally non conductive Mercury free Bondable to the calcified tissue

Requirement: -



Hardness value of the filler particles must not be higher than 3.39 Gpa


Young’s modulus ____ dentine


R.I. ___ enamel


Compressive strength more  Enamel 348 MPa  Dentine 297 MPa


Radiopacity should be higher than enamel 198% 9

Most common problem  Occlusal wear & poor fracture resistance  Occlusal loading and polymerization shrinkage Two mechanisms have been proposed: 1. Direct contact of the restoration with opposing cusp  High stresses are developed in small area of contact 2. Loss of material in non-contact area  Contact with a food bolus as forced across the occlusal surface Chewing habits Force levels

Patient variation

Oral environment Advantages: -

High free


Thermally non conductive


Bonding to tooth structure

Disadvantages: -

Technique sensitive


Contouring and wedging


Gap formation at interface


Indications: -

Patient allergic or sensitive to Hg


Patient afraid of Hg toxicity


Demand esthetics

Contraindications: -

Moisture control


Lack of time



Glass ionomer base under posterior composite: Concluded that, a flexible lining under posterior composite is required; because the interface between the restoration and the cavity wall is being stressed from the outset; due to polymerization contraction and later by mismatch of strain during functional loading. Flowable Composite: • Modulus of elasticity  composite increased Do not behave well under stress Ability to deform before breaking is reduced  Brittle • Polymerization shrinkage  flowable composites Modulus of elasticity  1/3rd of hybrid


• Used 1st increment of restoration as layer between dentine and restorative material  Absorbs some energy from the shrinkage of the restorative material Acts as a cushioning effect • Blocking out cavity undercuts during inlay; onlay and crown preparation Polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composite and filled adhesives: Studied polymerization shrinkage and elasticity of flowable composites. shrinkage

They than








show densely

higher filled

adhesives showed lower shrinkage. More densely filled adhesives were more rigid. Fibre Reinforced Composites: Structural material  Two distinct constituents  Reinforcing  Strength & Stiffness Surrounding – supports the reinforcement and provides workability -

Glass/ polyethelene and carbon fibres



Desirable properties – esthetics, adaptability, ease of use, potential for direct bond

Indirect Posterior Composites: Composite inlay system  Polymerized outside the mouth  Cemented to tooth with a compatible resin material Direct Indirect Light

Combination  Resin inlay construction

Heat Pressure


Apply separating medium to tooth  Restoration formed; light cured; removed  Subjected to additional light or heat 100° for min  Preparation is etched  Inlay is cemented to place with dual cure  Polished




 In addition to conventional light and heat curing; lab processing  140° pressure 6 MPa for 10 min  Polymerization under heat and pressure  Homogenous microfilled resin  Higher filler content Less porosity Greater colour stability Advantages: -

Improved physical properties; resistance to wear


Polymerization shrinkage does not occur in tooth  Induced stresses / bond failure/ leakage


Resins reparable in the mouth


Do not abrade the opposite tooth

Smart Composites: -

Flouride releasing composites


When there is a drop of pH on any particular surface; these composites then release fluoride from its surfaces and helps prevent demineralization of the tooth structure

Compomer: 14

Poly acid modified composite Introduced in 1993 ďƒ Composite ďƒ  G.I chemistry 2 parts: Restorative material:

Primer/ adhesive:

- Resins


- Activator/ initiator

- Elastomeric resin

- Glass

- Acetone

Advantages: Over G.I.:


1. Easy to handle

1. Bonding quicker/ simpler

2. Better colour

2. No acid etching

3. More strength

3. Flouide release

4. No mixing 5. Instant finishing 6. Resistant to abrasion -

Chemically almost similar to composite


H2O sorption almost equal to composite


Bond strength increase dentine than enamel


- Simplicity in application - Less technique sensitive - Preventing technical errors during bonding

Nilaido et al (1997) demonstrated one recent area of concern to the use of compomer is that; one layer of primer adhesive does not











significantly improved the bond strength.

Hardness of resin modified glass ionomer and compomers: Evaluated the bond strength of a compomer to dental enamel; dentine and cementum. They concluded that acid etching of enamel is recommended before the use of a bonding agent because it promotes higher bond strength of compomer to enamel; however similar treatment is not needed in case of dentine and cementum. Technical Considerations: 1) Local anaesthesia 2) Preparation of operating site: Clean ďƒ Plaque; pellicle; stains Calculus ďƒœ Site more receptive to bonding 3) Shade selection o Before subject the tooth to drying o Good natural light is advocated 4) Isolation: Rubber dam Cotton rolls Retraction cord


Acid Etching Technique: 1955 Bunocore  Uses phosphoric acid  Composite applied  Bonds well  Retentive system Technique: Clean tooth surface with pumice  Rinse – water spray  Carefully dry the tooth  Apply a base layer  With small applicator; bath the surface with etchant  Rinse the tooth from all aspects with water  Air dry  Frosty white appearance – successful etch 17

ďƒœ Restorative material placed


Dentine Bonding Agents: React – Mechanically Chemically Depends – Penetration of adhesive monomers into the collagen fibres left exposed by acid etching. First Generation: Development of surface active agent  Chelates with calcium on the tooth surface to generate water resistance chemical bond of resin to dentinal calcium. Second Generation: Phosphate ester material Negatively charged phosphate groups in the resin reacted with calcium in the smear layer. Third Generation: -

Acid etching followed by dentine bonding


Modified the smear layer to allow penetration of acidic monomer

Technique for Insertion of Composites: Chemically activated composites: 1. Equal amounts 2. Cross contamination avoided 3. Homogenous mixing 4. Inserted immediately after spatulation 5. Avoid air incorporation


6. Use of matrix band; without retainer Light Activated Composites: 1. Single component 2. Depth of cure limited 3. Not exposed to operatory light 4. High intensity curing unit should be used. 5. Curing  Proximal surface 6. Avoid looking on visible light

Curing of Composite Resins: 1. Chemically activated 2. Light curing -

Visible light – tungsten


Plasma arc light


Argon laser light



3. Dual cure Chemical Curing: 2 paste  Initiator

Free Radical  Initiate

 Activator


Disadvantages: 1. Oxygen incorporation 2. No control of working time


Light Curing: -

Single paste


Adequate working time


Allow insertion and contouring before curing is initiated


Not as sensitive to oxygen

Curing Lamps: -

Hand held devices


Few power unit connected to the hand piece by a long flexible liquid-filled light guide








environment Light Emitting Diode: -

Emit light only in blue part of spectrum


440-480 nm


Do not require fillers – no heat


Cooling fan not needed


Require low wattage  battery powered


Low intensity radiation

Quartz Tungsten Halogen: 




Both U.V. and white light – filtered


400 – 500 nm


Bulb intensity diminishes  21




Calibration meter to measure output intensity Plasma Arc Curing: -

Use a xenon gas  Ionized to produce a plasma


High intensity white light is filtered


Polymerization initiated  When free radical formed


For maximum curing  Which is 50-60% monomer conversion  16 joules/ cm2 for 2mm thick  Can be obtained by 40 sec exposure to a light emitting 400mW/sec2 Or 20 sec exposure / 800mW/sec2 or 13 sec / 1200 mW/sec2

Thus increased power density of lamp Increased rate of degree of cure Disadvantages: -

Placed incrementally 22


Shrink towards the light source


Technique sensitive

Dual Cure Resin:  Light + chemical 2 paste system: Benzoyl peroxide

Aromatic ter. amine

Mixed / Exposed  Polymerization is promoted Used: Situations that do not allow sufficient light penetration  Monomer conversion Recent Advances: Argon laser  initiate polymerization  Physical property superior  visible light Advantage: Rapid 10 sec application Xenon Plasma Arc Light: More intense than halogen  This neon laser produces increased heat  3 seconds 23

Diode Laser Light: -

True laser light


Ultra fast; 3-5 sec


Produces no heat

Curing Efficiency  Effectiveness of light energy  Visible light cure  410 – 500 nm

Precaution: Hardness







experimental LED base device. (J. Dent. Mat 201; 17(4):309-315) Evaluated hardness of composite resin cured by different LED; compared with conventional curing units. Hardness test. The LED  inferior hardness value when compared at 40 sec The light curing (device of 6 LED’s) was more efficient; it obtained 79 mw/cm2; whereas halogen irradiation was 475 mV/cm2.

A light curing method for improving marginal sealing and cavity wall adaptation of resin composite. (J. Dent. Mat 2001; 4:359-366) They studied to evaluate influence of light on – -

Marginal sealing and resin composite adaptation


Polymerization shrinkage rate



Hardness at top and bottom of surface. This study signifies that the use of a low initial light intensity

270 mw/cm2 for 10 seconds followed by 600 mW/cm2 for 50 seconds provides the best adaptation to the cavity walls and possibly the least polymerization shrinkage contraction stress. Finishing Process



Polishing the Removing



restorative material to the tooth achieving the smoothest possible e.g. remove over hang margins, surface. shaping occlusal surfaces Optimum finishing + polishing impression ďƒœ Residual surface roughness ďƒœ Encourage bacterial growth Steps: Contour the restoration with a bur -





Coarse-abrasive coated disc

Finish the restoration with -

Fine; extra fine diamond burs


White stones


Medium / fine abrasive coated discs ďƒœ


Polish with fine and extrafine paste rubber polishing discs

*Surface sealant application: (Low viscosity resin) -

Surface porosity




Never over heat


Well polished composite lasts longer

Class of composite Traditional (large particle) Hybrid (large particle) Hybrid (midifiller) Hybrid (minifiller/ SPF) Packable hybrid Flowable hybrid Homogeneous microfill Heterogeneous microfill

Particle size

Clinical use

1-50 µm glass

High-stress areas

1. 1-20 µm glass 2. 0.04 µm silica 1. 0.1-10 µm glass 2. 0.04 µm silica 1. 0.1-2 µm glass 2. 0.04 µm silica Midifiller/ minifiller hybrid, but with lower filler fraction Midfiller hybrid, but with finer particle size distribution 0.04 µm silica

High-stress areas requiring improved polishability (Classes I, II, III, IV) High stress areas requiring improved polishabiity (Class III, IV) Moderate stress areas requiring optimal polishability (Classes III, IV) Situations in which improved condensability is needed (Classes I, II) Situations in which improved flow is needed and/or where access is difficult (Class II) Low-stress and subgingival areas that require a high luster an polish Low-stress and subgingival areas where reduced shrinkage is essential

1. 0.04 µm silica 2. Prepolymerized resin particles containing 0.04 µm silica


Composite resin/ dental implant courses by Indian dental academy  
Composite resin/ dental implant courses by Indian dental academy  

The Indian Dental Academy is the Leader in continuing dental education , training dentists in all aspects of dentistry and offering a wide r...