Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2026
Roughness Impact of Piezoelectric Dental Scaler on Two Distinct Flowable Composite Filling Materials
Published on: January 10, 2025
Sliding wear of 19 commercially available composites and compomers
Catharina Zantner1, Andrej M Kielbassa, Peter Martus
1Department of Operative Dentistry and Periodontology, University School of Dental Medicine, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany. catharina.zantner@medizin.fu-berlin.de
Objectives:
The aim of this study was to determine the influence of particle size, particle material and morphology on the sliding wear of 19 light curing, commercially available composites (Durafill VS, Metafil CX, Heliomolar RO, Solitaire, Arabesk, Artglass, Charisma F, Pertac II, Charisma, Degufill Ultra, TPH Spectrum, Z100, Tetric classic, Pertac Hybrid, Estilux Hybrid, Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Compoglass and Hytac).
Methods:
The materials were applied to an aluminum sample holder (7.5 mm diameter, 2 mm depth) in one layer and polymerized in a Dentacolor XS light curing unit for 180 s. The surface was ground flat (#1000) to remove any matrix rich surface layer. Then samples were stored in Ringer's solution for 24 h at 37 degrees C. Occlusal contact wear was simulated in a sliding wear tester (Munich Artificial Mouth). Eight specimens of each material were tested in a pin-on-block design with oscillating sliding of a Degussit antagonist (5 mm diameter) at a vertical load of 50 N. The horizontal excursion of the antagonist was 8 mm. Wear was quantified by a replica technique every 6000, 10,000, 30,000 and 50,000 cycles using a 3D-laser scanner. The materials were compared by their mean wear after 50,000 cycles. Comparisons of different composites and compomers were performed using analysis of variance and t-tests including the Bonferroni correction.
Results:
The microfiller composites (Durafill VS, Metafil CX, Heliomolar RO) revealed the lowest, and the compomers (Dyract AP, Compoglass F, Compoglass and Hytac) showed the highest contact wear (p < 0.05). The wear of the hybrid composite (Estilux Hybrid) and the micro hybrid composites (Solitaire, Arabesk, Artglass, Charisma F, Pertac II, Charisma, Degufill Ultra, TPH Spectrum, Z100, Tetric classic, Pertac Hybrid) was higher than that of the microfiller composites (p < 0.05). The results showed additional significant differences within the three groups of composites. The coefficient of determination between loss of height and maximum particle size was r2 = 0.41.
Significance:
Both particle size and morphology have a high influence on the wear properties concerning the two-body wear in the occlusal contact area.
