COMPOSITES

PRESENTED BY- DR. JOEL DEVARAJ

GUIDED BY- DR. DEEPAK HEGDE
INTRODUCTION

• Various materials were being used for dental restorations since time
immemorial. These included stone chips, cork, turpentine, gum, lead, gold
leafs, resins, etc. Yet, none of these materials were able to provide
satisfactory results.
• Finally, by 7th century A.D, the Chinese developed & started using
‘Amalgam’ which had quite favorable properties.
• Over the years, it was developed to provide even better properties &
thereby the better clinical results.
• Therefore, the search for a primary permanent restorative material
for posterior teeth was eventually successful with the development
of Amalgam.
• Since this material was unaesthetic, it was not accepted for
restoration of anterior teeth. Then began the search for an aesthetic
restorative material.
• By 1878, Fletcher developed the first translucent material called
“Silicates”. This material, though initially well accepted, was found to
have drawbacks such as being highly irritating to pulp, high
marginal leakage, staining, poor in adhesion & unsatisfactory in
esthetics.
• Self curing acrylic resins were developed in 1930’s in Germany but
not marketed till late 1940’s because of the World War II.
Failed silicate cement restorations displaying Acrylic resin restoration displaying marginal
discoloration and loss of contour discoloration

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

• These were unfilled resins based on polymethyl methacrylate which
had poor activator system, high polymerization shrinkage, high co-
efficient of thermal expansion, lack of abrasion resistance, poor
marginal seal all of which indirectly leads to pulp injury, caries,
discoloration.
• In an effort to improve the physical characteristics of unfilled resins,
Dr Bowen of National Bureau of Standards developed a polymeric
dental restorative material reinforced with silica particles.
• The introduction of this filled material in 1962 became the basis for
the restorative materials which would be termed as “Composites”.
 HISTORY / EVOLUTION OF COMPOSITES

• Late 1930s First mention of methyl methacrylate

• 1949 Kramer and McLean published several papers on number of
materials in this category
• 1955 M. Buonocore –Acid –etch technique
• 1956 Dr. Bowen formulated Bis-GMA resin

The Evolution of Direct Composites By Frank J. Milnar, DDS, AAACD

Jan/Feb 2011 Volume 32, Issue 1 jcd.org
• 1962 Silane coupling agents introduced.
Macro composites developed
• 1970 First photo cured composites using UV light
• 1972 visible light curing unit introduced
• 1976 Microfilled composites developed
• Early 1980s Posterior composites introduced
• Mid 1980s Hybrid composites developed.
First generation indirect composites.
• Early 1990s Second generation indirect composites
• 1991 Beta quartz inserts developed Composite inlays developed
• 1996 Flowable composites developed
Ceromer (Ceramic optimized polymer)
indirect composites developed
• 1997 Packable composites introduced
• 1998 Ormocers developed
Ion-releasing composites developed
Fibre-reinforced composites developed
• 1999 Single crystal modified composites.
DEFINITION

• A composite material is a physical mixture of materials.

• It is defined as a “three- dimensional combination of at least two
chemically different materials with a distinct interface separating the
components"

Phillps R. Skinner's Science of Dental Materials. 11th edition

• Current composites have four major components:
i. a matrix phase that usually contains a dimethacrylate resin;
ii. polymerization initiators that are activated either chemically (by
mixing two materials) or by visible light (using a light- curing unit);
iii. a dispersed phase of fillers and
iv. a coupling agent (eg, silanes)

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and

COMPOSITION

I. ORGANIC RESIN MATRIX:

• One of the most important events of the 1960s was Dr. Bowen’s
development of Bis-GMA 2,2-bis[4-[2-hydroxy-3-
(methacryloyloxy)propyl]phenyl] monomer .
Moszner N, Salz U. New Developments of Polymeric Dental Composites.
Progress in Polymer Science (Oxford), 2001; 26: 535-576.
• As a result of its high strength and hardness, Bis-GMA is more
widely used as an organic monomer for dental composite materials.
• The hydrogen bonding interactions that occur between hydroxyl
groups result in the high viscosity of Bis-GMA (1.0-1.2 kPa at 23 ̊C)
• To solve this viscosity issue, manufacturers typically dilute the
monomer with a more fluid co-monomer: Triethylene glycol
dimethacrylate (TEGDMA)
 • Urethane dimethacrylate UDMA 1,6-bis[2-(methacryloyloxy)
ethoxycarbonylamino]-2,4,4-trimethylhexane has lower viscosity
(approximately 11,000 mPa at 23 ̊C) and excellent flexibility which
leads to better durability.
• This monomer has been used alone or in combination with other
monomers, such as BisGMA and TEGDMA.

Elliott JE, Lovell LG, Bowman CN. Primary Cyclization in the Polymerization of Bis-Gma and
Tegdma: A Modeling Approach to Understanding the Cure of Dental Resins. Dental Materials, 2001;
 • On the other hand, triethylene glycol dimethacrylate TEGDMA has
less viscosity than Bis-GMA (10 mPa.s 23 ̊C[19]) .
• Typically, a 1:1 ratio of TEGDMA and Bis-GMA is used.
• TEGDMA results in a clinically objectionable increase in
polymerization shrinkage

Floyd CJE, Dickens SH. Network Structure of Bis-Gma- and Udma-Based

Resin Systems. Dental Materials, 2006; 22: 1143-1149.
 INITIATORS AND ACCELERATORS

Chemically Activated Resins:

• Benzoyl-peroxide and a tertiary amine initiate the polymerization of
chemically activated composite resins.
• A multistep process leads to the formation of the polymerization-
initiating benzoyl radicals

Brauer GM. Initiator-Accelerator Systems for Acrylic Resins and Composites.

Polymer Science and Technology, 1981; 14: 395-409
 LIGHT-ACTIVATED RESINS

• Light activation is the most common method of curing dental

composites.
• Camphoroquinone (CQ) is the photo-initiator in light-activated
dental composites. It is sensitive to blue light in the 470-nm region
of the electromagnetic spectrum.
• Another photoinitiator, 1- phenyl-1,2-propanedione (PPD), which
has an absorption peak near 410 nm, has also been suggested as
an alternative.

Chae KH, Sun GJ. Phenylpropanedione; a New Visible Light Photosensitizer for Dental Composite
Resin with Higher Efficiency Than Camphorquinone. Bulletin of the Korean Chemical Society, 1998;
 COUPLING AGENT

• The bond between the polymer matrix and the filler particles is
usually accomplished by the use of the silane coupling agent, 3-
methacryloxypropyl trimethoxysilane (MPTMS).
• A significant advantage of silane coupling agents is that the
hydrolysis (and reformation) of the chemical bond between silane
coupling agents and filler materials is a reversible process. This is
beneficial as it may reduce internal stresses in the material.

Venhoven BAM, De Gee AJ, Werner A, Davidson CL. Silane Treatment of Filler and Composite
Blending in a One-Step Procedure for Dental Restoratives. Biomaterials, 1994; 15: 1152-1156.
 INORGANIC FILLER

• Many properties of material for composite restoration are improved

by increasing the amount of fillers .
• There is a direct relation between the physical/mechanical
properties of the resin composite and the amount of filler added.
• There is a wide range of fillers available. Glass particles are the
most common, due to their improved optical properties. Previously,
quartz was favoured and very commonly used.

O'Brien WJ. Dental Materials and Their Selection. Chicago: London: Quintessence
Pub. Co.; 2002.
• Other commonly used fillers include borosilicate glass, lithium,
barium aluminium silicate, and strontium or zinc glass.
• A range of silica-based glass fillers is available, including
amorphous or colloidal silica, fused silica and sol-gel zirconia silica
CLASSIFICATION

• Composites are usually divided into three types based primarily on

the size, amount, and composition of the inorganic filler:
(1) conventional composites,
(2) micro- fill composites, and
(3) hybrid composites

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

MACROFILLED COMPOSITES

• Macrofilled composites were first introduced in the late 1950s

• Macrofilled composites use relatively large inorganic quartz or glass
fillers.
• Filler particle size ranges from 0.1μm to 100 μm .
• Macrofilled composites typically exhibit a rough surface texture .

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

Scanning electron
micrograph of polished
surface of a conventional
composite

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

 • Macrofilled composites are difficult to polish to a smooth finish

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and

MICROFILLED COMPOSITES

• In the late 1970s, the microfill, or “polishable,” composites were

introduced.
• Microfill composites contain colloidal silica particles.
• Filler particle size ranges from 0.01- 0.05μm.
• Their physical and mechanical characteristics are inferior to
macrofilled composites.
• Microfill composite restorations flex during tooth flexure, better
protecting the bonding interface.
• The first microfilled composite introduced was Isopaste (Vivadent)
in 1977.
• Some examples are- Durafill® VS (Heraeus Kulzer Inc, Armonk,
NY), Renamel® Microfill (Cosmedent, Inc, Chicago, IL)
Scanning electron
micrograph of polished
surface of a microfilled
composite

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and
 HYBRID COMPOSITES

• Hybrid composites combine the features, and particularly the

advantages of both microfilled and macrofilled composites.
• Typically, hybrid composites contain a filler with an average particle
size of 15- 20 μm and 0.01- 0.05μm
• These materials generally have an inorganic filler content of
approximately 75% to 85% by weight.

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and

• Some examples are- TPH® (DENTSPLY Caulk, Milford, DE), and
Charisma® (Heraeus Kulzer Inc).
 NANOFILLED COMPOSITES

• Nanotechnology has led to the development of a new resin

composite.
• Filler particle size ranges from 0.005 - 0.01 μm
• The filler is made up of zirconium/silica or nanosilica particles.

(Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and

• An increased filler load is achieved by the reduced dimensions of
the particles, along with their wide size distribution.
• This consequently reduces the polymerization shrinkage and
increases the mechanical properties, such as tensile strength,
compressive strength and fracture resistance.
• These characteristics are higher than those of universal composites
and significantly superior to those of microfilled composites.
PROPERTIES OF COMPOSITES

I. Linear Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (LCTE)- The LCTE is the rate

of dimensional change of a material per unit change in temperature.
II. Water Absorption-Water absorption is the amount of water that a
material absorbs over time per unit of surface area or volume.
III. Wear Resistance- Wear resistance refers to a material’s ability to resist
surface loss as a result of abrasive contact
IV. Surface Texture- Surface texture is the smoothness of the surface of
the restorative material.

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

V. Radiopacity
V1. Modulus of Elasticity -Modulus of elasticity is the stiffness of a
material
V11. Solubility- Solubility is the loss in weight per unit surface area or
volume secondary to dissolution or disintegration of a material in oral
fluids, over time, at a given temperature.
V111. Polymerization Shrinkage- Composite materials shrink while
hardening.
INDICATIONS FOR COMPOSITE RESTORATION

1. Class I, II, III, IV, V, and VI restorations

2. Foundations or core buildups
3. Sealants and preventive resin restorations (conser- vative
composite restorations)
4. Esthetic enhancement procedures
5. Partial veneers
6. Full veneers

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

7. Tooth contour modifications
8. Diastema closures
9. Cements (for indirect restorations)
10. Temporary restorations
11. Periodontal splinting
CONTRAINDICATIONS

1. Isolation problems
2. Teeth with heavy or abnormal occlusal forces
3. Subgingival caries
4. Patient allergic or sensitive to resin composite

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

ADVANTAGES

• Esthetic
• Conservative of tooth structure removal (less exten- sion, uniform
depth not necessary, mechanical retention usually not necessary).
• Less complex when preparing the tooth.

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

• Insulative, having low thermal conductivity.
• Used almost universally.
• Bonded to tooth structure,resulting in good retention, low
microleakage, minimal interfacial staining, and increased strength
of remaining tooth structure.
• Repairable.
CONTRAINDICATIONS

1. Root caries
2. Time consuming and costly then amalgam restorations
3. Technique sensitive
4. Have a higher LCTE, resulting in potential marginal percolation if
an inadequate bonding technique is used.

Sturdevant, Art and Science of Operative Dentistry 5th Edition

REFERENCES

• Phillps R. Skinner's Science of Dental Materials. 11th edition

• Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and Techniques.
• Sturdevant Are & Science of Operative Dentistry.
• Moszner N, Salz U. New Developments of Polymeric Dental Composites.
Progress in Polymer Science (Oxford), 2001; 26: 535-576.
• Elliott JE, Lovell LG, Bowman CN. Primary Cyclization in the Polymerization of
Bis-Gma and Tegdma: A Modeling Approach to Understanding the Cure of Dental
Resins. Dental Materials, 2001; 17: 221-229
• Floyd CJE, Dickens SH. Network Structure of Bis-Gma- and Udma-Based Resin
Systems. Dental Materials, 2006; 22: 1143-1149.
• Brauer GM. Initiator-Accelerator Systems for Acrylic Resins and Composites. Polymer
Science and Technology, 1981; 14: 395-409
• The Evolution of Direct Composites By Frank J. Milnar, DDS, AAACD Jan/Feb 2011
Volume 32, Issue 1 jcd.org
• Chae KH, Sun GJ. Phenylpropanedione; a New Visible Light Photosensitizer for
Dental Composite Resin with Higher Efficiency Than Camphorquinone. Bulletin of the
Korean Chemical Society, 1998; 19: 152-154.
THANK YOU
TO BE CONTINUED…
CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION
2. HISTORY/ EVOLUTION OF COMPOSITES
3. DEFINITION
4. COMPONENTS OF COMPOSITES
5. CLASSIFICATION
6. INDICATIONS & CONTRINDICATIONS
7. ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES
CONTENTS

1. Properties
2. Curing Systems
3. Curing Techniques
4. Curing Lamps
5. Hazards Of Curing Lights
6. Recent Advances
7. Conclusion
8. References
 PROPERTIES

1. Linear Coefficient of Thermal Expansion:

• The LCTE is the rate of dimensional change of a material per unit
change in temperature.

1. Collins CJ, et al: A clinical evaluation of posterior composite resin restorations:

8-year findings, J Dent 26:311-317, 2004.

2. Versluis A, Douglas WH, Sakaguchi RL. Thermal expansion coefficient of

dental composites measured with strain gauges. Dent Mater. 1996 Sep;12(5):290-
4. PubMed PMID: 9170996
 2. Water Absorption:
• Water absorption is the amount of water that a material absorbs
over time per unit of surface area or volume.
• Materials with higher filler contents exhibit lower water absorption
values.
• Better bonding reduces water absorption.
A Comparative Evaluation of Water Absorption of Three Different Esthetic Restorative Materials – An
In-Vitro Study Dr. Yogesh Kumar1 , Dr. Arshia Kapoor2 , Dr. Neetu Jindal3 , Dr. Renu Aggarwal4 , Dr.
Kanika Aggarwal. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences ;15, Issue 3 Ver. III (Mar. 2016), PP
21-24
3. Wear Resistance
• Wear resistance refers to a material’s ability to resist surface loss as
a result of abrasive contact with opposing tooth structure,
restorative material, food boli, and such items as toothbrush bristles
and toothpicks.
An in vitro investigation of wear resistance and hardness of composite resins
Liqun Cao,1 Xinyi Zhao,2 Xu Gong,2 and Shouliang Zhao , Int J Clin Exp Med. 2013; 6(6):
423–430.
 4. Surface Texture
• Surface texture is the smoothness of the surface of the restorative
material.
• Size and composition of filler particles and the materials ability to be
finished and polished.
Başeren M. Surface roughness of nanofill and nanohybrid composite resin and ormocer-based
tooth-colored restorative materials after several finishing and polishing procedures. J Biomater
Appl. 2004 Oct;19(2):121-34. PubMed PMID: 15381785.
5. Radiopacity
• Esthetic restorative materials must be sufficiently radiopaque.
• Most composites contain radiopaque fillers, such as barium glass,
to make the material radiopaque.
 6. Modulus of Elasticity
• Modulus of elasticity is the stiffness of a material.
• A material having a higher modulus is more rigid; conversely, a
material with a lower modulus is more flexible.
Heymann HO, et al: Examining tooth flexure effects on cervical restorations: a two-year
clinical study, J Am Dent Assoc 122:41-47, 1991.
7. Polymerization Shrinkage
• Composite materials shrink while hardening. This is referred to as
polymerization shrinkage.
• Careful control of the amount and insertion point of the material and
appropriate placement of etchant, primer, and adhesive on the
prepared tooth structure to improve bonding reduce these
problems.
(1) “soft-start” polymerization instead of high-intensity light curing;
(2) incremental additions to reduce the effects of polymerization
shrink- age; and
(3) a stress-breaking liner, such as a filled dentinal adhesive,
flowable composite, or RMGI.
CURING SYSTEMS

• 1. Autocured System ( Chemically Actived) :

• Autocured (ie, chemically activated) systems, usually consisting of two
pastes, which dominated the tooth- colored restorative field for many
years.
• Auto- cured systems generate small amounts of heat during curing and do
not need a light source.

Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and Techniques.

• Their disadvantages include:
• (1) A long setting time, ‘
• (2) Voids in the final restorative (voids caused by mixing typically
account for 3 to 10% of the volume, inhibiting polymerization and
increasing surface roughness), and
• (3) A higher probability of long- term discoloration after placement.
• 2. Ultraviolet light-activated systems
• The first light-activated systems, introduced in 1970, used UV light, which
presented the advantages of rapid cure; indefinite working time, because
no setting occurs until the light source is applied; and less composite
waste.
• The disadvantages of UV light-activated systems include: (1) curing units
require a 5-minute warm-up period, (2) depth of light penetration is 1 to 2
mm at best, (3) maintaining the light at 100% efficiency is difficult, and (4)
UV radiation can cause corneal burns.
• 3. Visible light-activated systems
• Over the past 25 years, many visible light-cured composite resins
and curing units have been introduced.
• The key advantages of visible light-activated composites are:
• (1) materials can be manipulated longer and still have a shorter
curing time (20–40 seconds or less vs. minutes for autocured
composites),
• (2) earlier finishing, and
• (3) better color stability.
• The disadvantages of visible light-activated composites include:
• (1) possible eye damage (retinal burns with visible light systems),
• (2) a maximum depth of light penetration of about 3 mm,
• (3) heat generation that could harm the pulp, and
• (4) the high purchase and maintenance costs of curing lights.

• Nevertheless, the advantages out- weigh the disadvantages, making

visible light-curing the preferred system.
• Configeration factor (C factor):
• The most important consideration a dentist has when placing a
restorative that shrinks on setting, like composites, is the number of
opposing walls facing the restorative since these margins can be
opened when the material shrinks.
• The c-factor (configeration factor) is a term used for the ratio of the
number of walls bonded to unbonded.
 CURING TECHNIQUES

1. CONTINUOUS
CURING
TECHNIQUES :
2. DISCONTINUOUS
CURING
TECHNIQUES
CURING LAMPS

1. Tungsten-halogen :
• Many halogen curing lamps use a 50- to 100-watt bulb to produce
500 mW of light that peaks at 468 nm.
• This approach yields an efficiency rate of only 0.5%; the other
99.5% of the energy is simply given off as heat.

Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and Techniques.

2. Plasma arc :
• The plasma arc lamps (short-arc xenon) used for pulse energy
curing usually have a 5-mm spot size and a wide bandwidth
covering 380 to 500 nm.
• They yield a power density up to 2500 mW/cm2. This is a
tremendously powerful light energy source that requires a wait time
(minimum 10 seconds) after each use to allow the unit to recover.
The high intensity of the lamp causes silver to precipitate on the
lamp window, which degrades lamp output over time.
3. Laser:
• Laser lights (argon-ion) emit specific bandwidths of light at about
454 to 466 nm, 472 to 497 nm, and 514 nm (usable blue light).
Lasers produce little heat, because of limited infrared output.
• A major limitation of arc and laser lamps is that they have a narrow
light guide (or spot size)
4. Light-emitting diode:
• Light-emitting diode curing lamps offer many advantages over other
curing lamps. Light-emitting diodes are special semiconductors that
emit light when connected in a circuit.
• Unlike halogen lamps, LEDs emit a narrow bandwidth of light,
around 468 nm, and have an efficiency of about 16%.
• In addition, the LED would use less power, about 6 watts rather
than 100 watts, to achieve needed curing.
• Alber's
. Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and Techniques.
OCULAR HAZARDS OF CURING LIGHTS

• Ham WT. Ocular hazards of light sources: review of current knowledge. J Occup
Med 1983;25:101–3.
• Ham WT, Ruffolo JJ, Mueller HA, Guerry DK. The nature of retinal radiation
damage: dependence on wave- length, power level, and exposure time. Vision
Res 1980;20:1105–11.
• Ham WT, Mueller H, Sliney D. Retinal sensitivity to damage from short
wavelength light. Nature 1976; 260:153–4.
• Ham WT, Mueller HA, Ruffolo JJ, etal. Basicmech- anisms underlying the
production of photochemical lesions in the mammalian retina. Curr Eye Res
1984;3:165–74.
 • The first researchers to study eye damage from blue light were
Zigman and Vaugh.

Zigman S,VaughT. Near-ultra violet light effects on the lenses and

retinas of mice. Invest Ophthalmol 1974;13:462–5.
• It has been shown that blue light forms free radicals in the eye, just
as it does in composite resins.
• However, in the retina, these free radicals react with the water-
content of cells, causing peroxides to form in the visual cells.
• These peroxides are reactive and denature the delicate
photoreceptors of the eye. The results are harmful to vision.
• Researchers estimate that blue light is 33 times more damaging to
the photoreceptors of the retina than is UV light.

Alber's Tooth-colored Restoratives, Principles and Techniques.

 A histology slide showing the eye
damage that can accompany large
amounts of blue light exposure.

Ham WT, Mueller Ruffolo JJ. Action

spectrum for retinal injury from near-
ultraviolet radi- ation in the aphakic
monkey. Am J Ophthalmol
1982;93:299–306.)
 RECENT ADVANCES IN COMPOSITES

1. ANTIMICROBIAL COMPOSITE:
• Silver and titanium particles were introduced into dental composites,
respectively, to introduce antimicrobial properties and enhance the
biocompatibility of the composites.
• Hansel C, Leyhausen G, Mai UE, et al. Effects of carious resin composite (co)monomers and
extracts on two caries associated microorganisms in vitro. J Dent Res. 1998; 77:60- 67.

• Beyth N, Yudovin-Farber I, Bahir R, Domb AJ, Weissa E. Antibacterial activity of dental

composites containing quaternary ammonium polyethylenimine nanoparticles against
Streptococcus mutans. Biomaterials 2006; 21: 3995-4002
3. SELF HEALING COMPOSITE:
• Materials usually have a limited lifetime and degrade due to
different physical, chemical, and biological stimuli.
• These may include external static (creep) or dynamic (fatigue)
forces, internal stress states, corrosion, dissolution, erosion, or
biodegradation.
• One of the first self-repairing or self-healing synthetic materials
reported interestingly shows some similarities to resin-based dental
material; it was the epoxy resin composite.
• If a crack occurs in the epoxy composite material, some of the
microcapsules are destroyed near the crack and release the resin.
• The resin subsequently fills the crack and reacts with a Grubbs
catalyst dispersed in the epoxy composite, resulting in a
polymerization of the resin and repair of the crack
Badami V, Ahuja B. Biosmart
materials: Breaking new ground in
dentistry. Scientific World Journal
2014;2014:986912
4. Smart Composites:
• Generally, Boskey mentioned that Aaron S. Posner to have be
described amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP) [7] in the mid-
1960s.
• Skrtic has developed unique biologically active restorative materials
containing ACP as filler encapsulated in a polymer binder, which
may stimulate the repair of tooth structure because of releasing
significant amounts of calcium and phosphate ions in a sustained
manner.
 • 5. Fiber Reinforced Composite:
• Fiber-reinforced composites have numerous industrial and
aerospace applications because they are light, strong and non-
flammable.
• However, with respect to clinical dentistry, they are relative
newcomers into the spectrum of prosthodontic treatment options.
• Over the years, these materials have evolved to the extent that they
Rosensteil
can SF,be
Land MF,for
used Fujimoto J. Contemporary
both direct Fixed
and indirect Prosthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis:
restorations.
Mosby; 2001. p. 697-706. 10. Freilich MA, Meiers JC, Duncan JP, Goldberg AJ. Fibrereinforced
Composite in Clinical Dentistry. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co., Inc.; 2000.
• 6. Compomers :
• Compomers (also known as polyacid-modified resin composites)
are fluoride-containing resin composites.
• The first, Variglass VLC from the Dentsply/Caulk company, was
marketed in the early 1990s and was advertised as a light-activated,
multipurpose glass ionomer.
• Despite their limitations, though, compomers are generally quite
esthetic, and are marketed as having many of the advantages of
true glass ionomers, including fluoride release and the ability to
chemically bond to tooth structure
• Some examples of compomers are :
1. Dyract AP (Dentsply/Caulk)
2. Hytac Aplitip (3M ESPE)
3. Compoglass F (Ivoclar Vivadent)
4. Elan (SDS/Kerr)
5. F2000 (3M ESPE)
CONCLUSION

• Nowadays, composites have unquestionably acquired a prominent

place among the filling materials employed in direct techniques.
• Their considerable aesthetic possibilities give rise to a variety of
therapeutic indications, which continue to grow as a result of the
great versatility of the presentations offered; also, these materials
conserve the tooth structure better because they are retained by
adhesive methods rather than depending on cavity design.
• Nonetheless, it should not be forgotten that they are highly
technique-sensitive, hence the need to control certain aspects:
correct indication, good isolation, choice of the right composite for
each situation, use of a good procedure for bonding to the dental
tissues and proper curing are essential if satisfactory clinical results
are to be achieved.
THANK
YOU !!