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 August 2024 | Viewed by 1323

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

Published Papers (2 papers)

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

Research

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
Viewed by 328
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 761
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