materials-logo

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Biocompatibility of Restorative Dental Materials

A special issue of Materials (ISSN 1996-1944). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomaterials".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 20 February 2025 | Viewed by 3404

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Interests: dental materials; biomimetic materials; glass ionomer cements; adhesion; bio-mimetic procedures
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In recent times, preventive and restorative procedures have evolved from surgical preparations to the healing and remineralisation of hard dental tissues. The materials used should be not only biocompatible, but also bioactive, thereby provoking an adequate tissue response, leading to the remineralisation of dental hard tissues (enamel, dentin and cement), defects, and pulp tissues. Preventive materials, such as CPP/ACP, bioactive glass, tricalcium phosphate or xylitol, among others, can promote the remineralisation and healing of hard dental tissues and affect saliva microbiotic flora. Some  restorative materials can remineralise caries lesions and heal infected pulp tissue without decreasing their mechanical properties. The aim of this Special Issue is to spotlight the recent advances in the development of biocompatible/bioactive dental materials, their action, and mechanical properties

Prof. Dr. Domagoj Glavina
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • biocompatibility
  • bioactivity
  • CPP/ACP
  • bioactive glass
  • tricalcium phosphate
  • GIC

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue polices can be found here.

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

14 pages, 612 KiB  
Article
Shear Bond Strength of Orthodontic Brackets Bonded with Thermo-Cured Glass-Based Materials—An In Vitro Study
by Stipo Cvitanović, Ružica Zovko, Mirela Mabić, Sanja Jurišić, Nevenka Jelić-Knezović, Domagoj Glavina and Kristina Goršeta
Materials 2024, 17(13), 3090; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17133090 - 24 Jun 2024
Viewed by 759
Abstract
The results of orthodontic therapy largely depend, among other factors, on the preparation of the tooth enamel itself and the choice of material used to bond orthodontic brackets. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) [...] Read more.
The results of orthodontic therapy largely depend, among other factors, on the preparation of the tooth enamel itself and the choice of material used to bond orthodontic brackets. The aim of this in vitro study was to determine the shear bond strength (SBS) and adhesive remnant index (ARI) score of thermo-cured glass–ionomers on different pretreated enamel, in comparison with the commonly used composite cement. Three commercially available nano-ionomer or highly viscous glass–ionomer cements (EQUIA Forte® Fil, EQUIA Fil, Ketac Universal) and two types of compo-sites (Heliosit Orthodontic, ConTec Go!) were investigated in this study. The research involved two hundred human premolars. The teeth were cleaned and polished, then randomly divided into five groups according to the enamel preparation method and the type of material. The enamel was treated in three different ways: polyacrylic acid, phosphoric acid, 5% NaOCl + etching with phosphoric acid, and a control group without treatment. Glass–ionomer cement was thermo-cured with heat from a polymerization unit during setting. Statistical analysis was performed using a Chi-square test and one-way ANOVA for independent samples. Spearman’s Rho correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship. Regardless of the material type, the results indicated that the weakest bond between the bracket and tooth enamel was found in samples without enamel pretreatment. The majority of the materials stayed on the brackets in samples without enamel preparation, according to ARI scores. The study’s findings demonstrated that the strength of the adhesion between the bracket and enamel is greatly influenced by enamel etching and glass–ionomer thermo-curing. Clinical investigations would be required to validate the outcomes. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biocompatibility of Restorative Dental Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 3432 KiB  
Article
Physicochemical Changes in Root-Canal Sealers under Thermal Challenge: A Comparative Analysis of Calcium Silicate- and Epoxy-Resin-Based Sealers
by Hye-In Kim, Young-Eun Jang, Yemi Kim and Bom Sahn Kim
Materials 2024, 17(8), 1932; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17081932 - 22 Apr 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1035
Abstract
Introduction: We compared the effects of heat on the physicochemical properties of recently developed calcium silicate-based sealers (CSBSs), including BioRoot Flow, BioRoot RCS, and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer, with those of the epoxy-resin-based sealer (ERBS) AH Plus. Methods: The flow, film thickness, setting [...] Read more.
Introduction: We compared the effects of heat on the physicochemical properties of recently developed calcium silicate-based sealers (CSBSs), including BioRoot Flow, BioRoot RCS, and AH Plus Bioceramic sealer, with those of the epoxy-resin-based sealer (ERBS) AH Plus. Methods: The flow, film thickness, setting time, and solubility of sealers were evaluated at 37 °C and 100 °C using ISO 6876/2012. Furthermore, pH and calcium ion release were evaluated at these temperatures. In addition, the mass change in sealers at a high temperature was assessed via thermogravimetric analysis. Then, the chemical composition and components of the sealers were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Results: BioRoot Flow, AH Plus Bioceramic, and AH Plus complied with ISO standards in terms of flow and film thickness, both before and after heat application. However, BioRoot RCS exhibited significantly increased film thickness at 100 °C. The setting times of all sealers were significantly reduced at 100 °C. The solubility of CSBS was >3%, exceeding the ISO 6876/2012 standard, both before and after heat exposure. Conversely, the solubility of AH Plus complied with the standard, regardless of the thermal condition. For 4 weeks, CSBS showed a significantly higher pH than AH Plus at both 37 °C and 100 °C. After heat treatment, calcium release decreased in Bioroot RCS and BioRoot Flow, while AH Plus showed no significant differences before and after treatment. However, CSBS consistently exhibited significantly higher calcium release than AH Plus at both temperatures. An FTIR analysis revealed that the chemical composition of the sealers did not change at the high temperature, whereas a thermogravimetric analysis demonstrated a >5% weight reduction in CSBS and a 0.005% weight reduction in AH Plus at 100 °C. Conclusions: BioRoot Flow, AH Plus Bioceramic, and AH Plus possess favorable physicochemical properties, which make them suitable for application under thermal conditions. At a high temperature, BioRoot RCS did not exhibit changes in its chemical composition. However, its film thickness was increased, and pH and solubility were reduced. Therefore, caution is needed when it is applied at high temperatures, such as during the warm obturation technique. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biocompatibility of Restorative Dental Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1055 KiB  
Article
Degree of Standardisation in Ceramic Gingival Systems
by Alejandra Díaz Hernández, Ana María Martín Casado, Miguel Gómez-Polo, Alicia Celemín Viñuela and Cristina Gómez-Polo
Materials 2023, 16(20), 6710; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16206710 - 16 Oct 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1165
Abstract
No gingival shade guide exists that can be used as a ‘gold standard’ in gingival shade selection. This research, therefore, aimed to determine whether comparable results in subjective gingival shade selection can be achieved using basic gingival colours produced by distinct manufacturers. It [...] Read more.
No gingival shade guide exists that can be used as a ‘gold standard’ in gingival shade selection. This research, therefore, aimed to determine whether comparable results in subjective gingival shade selection can be achieved using basic gingival colours produced by distinct manufacturers. It also aimed to explore how coverage of the colour space is affected by mixing these basic colours to create additional shades. To achieve these objectives, the basic gingival colours of three ceramic systems (Heraceram, Kulzer, Madrid, Spain; Vita VM9, Vita Zahnfabrik, Bad Säckingen, Germany; IPS Style, Ivoclar, Schaan, Liechtenstein) were analysed. The colour systems were expanded by creating porcelain gingival samples, whose colours were obtained by mixing the basic colours, altering each mixture by increments of 10%, and respecting the numerical order used by manufacturers to identify the colours. The colour coordinates of the basic and additional colours were recorded using spectrophotometry, and the intra- and inter-system colour differences were calculated using the Euclidean (ΔEab) and CIEDE2000 (ΔE00) formulae. None of the basic colours in the three systems, despite their similar nomenclature, were found to be interchangeable (the colour differences exceeded the gingival acceptability threshold: ΔE00 2.9 units). The expanded gingival colour systems, with mixtures altered by 10% increments, notably increased the gingival colour space covered by the original systems. The authors concluded that there are clear differences between the basic gingival colours produced by distinct manufacturers using the same nomenclature. Ceramic samples produced by mixing basic gingival colours are a resource with the potential to improve subjective gingival shade matching. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biocompatibility of Restorative Dental Materials)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop