CATEGORY 78 AUSTRALASIAN DENTIST LINICAL E. Compressive Strength Having a high compressive strength value is an indication of how well the composite restorative material will handle the daily stress of functional load and mastication forces. Literature has long established a baseline for the fracture resistance of natural tooth structure. Healthy Dentin has shown to offer a compressive strength of 297 MPa (Craig et al., 1961)5, while Enamel is typically capable of withstanding a higher 384 MPa of load before fracturing (Craig et al., 1961)8. Literature10 has shown that the average “steady wear rate” on occlusal contact areas (enamel on enamel) is 29 µm per year for molars and 15 µm per year for pre-molars. With a recorded wear value of 17µm, GrandioSO once again exhibits excellent performance in the oral cavity. As illustrated in the study above, GrandioSO delivered a value of 439 MPa and is actually stronger than natural tooth structure. This assures that the composite can withstand peak loads over time, providing a very strong and durable restorative option for the clinician. Compressive strength has no direct correlation to endhardness or wear. Nor does it have any negative impact on opposing dentition. F. Three (3) Body Wear While there aremany ways to test the resistance to the wearing down of a composite, 3-body wear offers the most accurate representation of an oral environment. The testing protocol simulates erosive wear (1) and contact sliding wear (2) in the presence of a third-body medium/food (3). A sample of the composite is held in a jig device, while an antagonist (sanding disc) applies pressure on the composite and a slurry of Al2O3 Paste (De Gee et al., 1994)9 – simulating food – is injected in between the antagonist and the sample. The result is a 3-body wear test that simulates natural chewing with enamel grinding down on a composite restoration, with food in between the two substrates. Source: Dr. Walter Denner – Fulda, Germany This paper has presented the key performance indicators for success and the associated values for GrandioSO and many of the mainstream materials available during the initial launch of the product. However, as always, new technologies and chemistries have continued to be developed and the question one must ask, is after all these developments over the course of a decade, how does GrandioSO stack up against the modern materials now present in the marketplace? The following section of this paper will share the testing results for the key performance indicators for GrandioSo and some common competitors. 1. Volumetric Shrinkage – 2022 GrandioSO presents with a volumetric shrinkage value of 1.61%, SonicFil 3 with a value of 1.65% and Venus Diamond, a value of 1.60%. Even after a decade, GrandioSO is still a leader in this testing category. 2. Compressive Strength – 2022 GrandioSO presents with a compressive strength that eclipses all other brands in this study group with a value of 439 MPa – the clear leader in this testing category.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTc3NDk3Mw==