Radiopacity of Posterior Restorative Materials: A Comparative In Vitro Study

M Balci; L S Turkun; H Boyacıoglu; P Guneri; Z Ergucu

doi:10.2341/22-042-L

Radiopacity of Posterior Restorative Materials: A Comparative In Vitro Study

Oper Dent. 2023 May 1;48(3):337-346. doi: 10.2341/22-042-L.

Authors

M Balci¹, L S Turkun², H Boyacıoglu³, P Guneri⁴, Z Ergucu⁵

Affiliations

¹ Melin Balci, DDS, PhD, Ege University, Faculty of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Bornove, Izmir, Turkey.
² Lezize Sebnem Turkun, DDS, PhD, assistant professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Izmir Tinaztepe University, Izmir, Turkey.
³ Hayal Boyacıoglu, PhD, professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.
⁴ Pelin Guneri, DDS, PhD, associate professor, Department of Statistics, School of Science, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.
⁵ *Zeynep Ergucu, DDS, PhD, professor, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, School of Dentistry, Ege University, Izmir, Turkey.

PMID: 37079911
DOI: 10.2341/22-042-L

Abstract

Background: The objective was to investigate the radiopacity of 11 commercial posterior restorative materials by establishing their mean gray values (MGVs) and comparing them with dental hard tissues.

Methods and materials: Five-disc specimens were prepared for each of the following materials: Cerasmart 270 CAD/CAM block A3LT (CS), Amalgam (A), Ketac Molar A3 (KM), Cention-N A2 (CN), G-aenial Universal Flo AO2 (GO2) and A2 (G2), Ever-X Flow Dentine (EXD) and Bulk (EXB) shades, Equia Forte HT Fil A2 (EF2) and A3 (EF3), and Equia Fil A3 (E3). Freshly extracted maxillary premolar teeth were used as a control. The MGVs of specimens and a 10-step aluminum stepwedge (Al) were measured with Adobe Photoshop. ANOVA and Dunnett T3 tests were used to assess the significance of the differences (α=0.05).

Results: Statistically significant differences were revealed between some of the groups. Amalgam had the highest radiopacity. The radiopacity of dentin and CS were close to that of 1 mm Al. G2, KM, GO2, EXB, and EXD showed higher mean radiopacity than dentin. Enamel had a radiopacity equivalent to 2 mm Al. CN, EF2, and E3 had higher mean radiopacity than enamel.

Conclusions: All materials met the ISO requirements. Alkasite and reinforced glass ionomer restoratives demonstrated higher mean radiopacity than the posterior flowable composites. Material shades did not affect the radiopacity.

MeSH terms

Composite Resins*
Dental Enamel
Dental Materials
Dentin* / diagnostic imaging
Materials Testing

Substances

dixanthogen
Composite Resins
Dental Materials