Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 23, 2025
07:42
Quasistatic Mechanical Testing for Computer-Aided Design and Manufacturing Occlusal Veneers Cemented to Milled Dentin Analog Material
Published on: December 20, 2024
528
Flexural Properties of Bioactive Restoratives in Cariogenic Environments
Operative Dentistry
|August 23, 2021
Summary
Bioactive dental restoratives showed decreased flexural strength in cariogenic environments, with material type influencing outcomes. Conventional composites and some bioactive materials maintained strength better than others under acidic conditions.
Area of Science:
- Biomaterials Science
- Dental Materials
- Restorative Dentistry
Background:
- Bioactive dental restorative materials offer potential advantages over conventional composites.
- Understanding their mechanical performance in cariogenic environments is crucial for clinical longevity.
- Cariogenic conditions can compromise the structural integrity of dental materials.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the mechanical performance of bioactive restoratives in cariogenic environments.
- To compare the flexural properties of various bioactive materials against a conventional composite.
- To assess the impact of demineralization and pH cycling on restorative material strength.
Main Methods:
- Four restorative materials were tested: a conventional resin composite (Filtek Z350), an alkasite (Cention N), a giomer (Beautifil-bulk Restorative), and a resin-modified glass ionomer (Activa Bioactive Restorative).
- Specimens were conditioned in deionized, remineralizing, demineralizing, or pH-cycled solutions for 14 days at 37°C.
- Three-point flexural testing was performed, and data analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey's test.
Main Results:
- Flexural modulus was largely unaffected by cariogenic conditions, but flexural strength generally decreased.
- The alkasite (Cention N) showed no significant strength decrease, while the giomer (Beautifil-bulk Restorative) and resin-modified glass ionomer (Activa Bioactive Restorative) showed significant reductions.
- Conventional composite (Filtek Z350) and Activa Bioactive Restorative generally exhibited higher flexural strength than Beautifil-bulk Restorative and Cention N, except under demineralizing conditions.
Conclusions:
- The mechanical performance of bioactive restoratives in cariogenic environments is material-dependent.
- While flexural modulus remained stable, flexural strength of most bioactive materials decreased under acidic challenge.
- Alkasite materials may offer better resistance to strength degradation in cariogenic environments compared to giomers and RMGIs.
