Submit to Materials Review for Materials Propose a Special Issue

Journal Browser

► Journal Browser

Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge

Print Special Issue Flyer
Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers

A special issue of Materials (ISSN 1996-1944). This special issue belongs to the section "Biomaterials".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 June 2023) | Viewed by 8311

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Anna Paradowska-Stolarz

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Department of Dentofacial Anomalies, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Wroclaw Medical University, Wrocław, Poland
Interests: dentofacial anomalies; cleft lip and / or palate; biomaterials; 3D print; orthodontics
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Prof. Dr. Mieszko Wieckiewicz

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor

Department of Experimental Dentistry, Wroclaw Medical University, 26 Krakowska St., 50425 Wroclaw, Poland
Interests: temporomandibular disorders; bruxism; orofacial pain; dental sleep medicine, clinical dentistry; dental materials; fixed prosthodontics; removable prosthodontics; dental education
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The development of dentistry in the past 20 years is compelling, especially in dental materials science. The composition of materials; the biological, physical and chemical features of materials; material engineering; various aspects of biocompatibility; the release of ingredients from materials themselves and their coatings, new types of medicines, new formulations, as well as 3D printing are very promising and rapidly developing branches of dentistry. Furthermore, the aspect of ecology in the production of novel materials should be taken into account.

We would like to introduce the XXI century trends in dental materials manufacturing, processing and pharmacy and the expectations associated with them. We would like to accept papers about novel medicaments and medical carriers and their use as well. The aim of this Special Issue is to emphasize the recent changes and trends in this branch of oral sciences and to present the latest original and review papers related to modern dental materials.

We invite you to upload original papers and reviews (including metaanalysis and systematic reviews, in particular) on the topics mentioned above.

Dr. Anna Paradowska-Stolarz
Prof. Dr. Mieszko Wieckiewicz
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Materials is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

dental materials
biomaterials
3D printing
coatings

Published Papers (4 papers)

Download All Papers

Research

10 pages, 1794 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Comparison of Two Chosen 3D Printing Resins Designed for Orthodontic Use: An In Vitro Study

by Anna Paradowska-Stolarz, Joanna Wezgowiec and Marcin Mikulewicz

Materials 2023, 16(6), 2237; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ma16062237 - 10 Mar 2023

Cited by 6 | Viewed by 1727

Abstract

(1) Background: In recent years, 3D printing has become a highly popular tool for manufacturing in various fields such as aviation, automobiles, plastics, and even medicine, including dentistry. Three-dimensional printing allows dentists to create high-precision models of teeth and jaw structure, and enables them to develop customized tools for patients’ treatment. The range of resins used in dentistry is quite large, and this branch is developing rapidly; hence, studies comparing different resins are required. The present study aimed to compare the mechanical properties of two chosen resins used in dentistry. (2) Materials and methods: Ten specimens each of two types of 3D-printable resins (BioMed Amber and IBT, developed by Formlabs) were prepared. The samples were printed on a Formlabs Form 2 3D printer according to ISO standards. Samples for the compression test were rectangular in shape (10 ± 0.2 mm × 10 ± 0.2 mm × 4 ± 0.2 mm), while the samples used for the tensile test were dumbbell shaped (75 mm long, with 10 mm end width and 2 mm thickness). Tensile and compression tests of both materials were performed in accordance with the appropriate ISO standards. (3) Results: The BioMed Amber resin was more resistant to compression and tensile forces, thus implying that the resin could withstand higher stress during stretching, pulling, or pushing. The IBT resin was less resistant to such loads, and failure of this material occurred at lower forces than those for Biomed Amber. An ANOVA test confirmed that the observed differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: Based on the properties of both materials, the IBT resin could be better used as a tray for placing orthodontic brackets through an indirect bonding technique, while the BioMed Amber resin would be more useful as a surgical guide for placing dental implants and mini-implants. Further potential fields of application of the resins should be investigated. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 2530 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Comparison of the Compression and Tensile Modulus of Two Chosen Resins Used in Dentistry for 3D Printing

by Anna Paradowska-Stolarz, Andrzej Malysa and Marcin Mikulewicz

Materials 2022, 15(24), 8956; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ma15248956 - 15 Dec 2022

Cited by 19 | Viewed by 1904

Abstract

(1) The CAD/CAM technique exploiting 3D printing is becoming more and more popular in dentistry. The resins are used in all the dental specialties, including conservative dentistry, prosthodontics, surgery, and orthodontics. The interest in investigating the different properties of dental materials has been an aim of researchers. The purpose of the presented study was to compare the properties of two 3D-printable dental resins (both rigid, used for medical purposes). (2) Methods: Ten blocks of two-type shapes were printed on a printer designed for medical use. The tensile modulus and compression were investigated and compared. The axial compression test was performed according to the PN-EN ISO 604:2003 norm, while the tensile test was performed according to the PN-En ISO 527-1-2019 (E) norm. In the first test, the sample size of the perpendicular shape was 10 ± 0.2 mm × 10 ± 0.2 mm × 4 ± 0.2 mm and in the second it was 75 mm, the end width 10 mm, and the thickness 2 mm. (3) Results: The statistical analysis based on ANOVA tests showed that all the obtained results were statistically significant. Both of the examined materials had similar properties and were resistant and stable in shape. The tensile modulus and compression tests performed on them gave similar results. They also showed high durability to compression and tensility. (4) Conclusions: Both of the examined materials were durable and rigid materials. BioMed Amber was more resistant to compression, while Dental LT clear was more resistant in the tensility test. Although both resins had similar physical properties, it is still disputable whether the chosen materials could be used interchangeably. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1573 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating

by Aurel-Claudiu Vartolomei, Dan-Cosmin Serbanoiu, Dana-Valentina Ghiga, Marioara Moldovan, Stanca Cuc, Maria Cristina Figueiredo Pollmann and Mariana Pacurar

Materials 2022, 15(12), 4304; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ma15124304 - 17 Jun 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 1687

Abstract

Friction is an intensely studied feature in orthodontics, as the sliding mechanics approach remains one of the most utilized techniques in current practice, and the question of whether self-ligating brackets produce less friction than conventional brackets still stands. The objective of this study was to compare a self-ligating system with different closing mechanisms and a conventional system with different ligating mechanisms regarding their frictional properties. Laboratory measurements were performed using an advanced materials testing machine generating tensile strength and load at maximum Load values, which were statistically analyzed and compared. These two parameters have been associated with the frictional resistance generated at the archwire–bracket slot interface. Statistically significant results were obtained when comparing the active self-ligating brackets with the passive self-ligating (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum moad mean 6.000, SD 1.3000) and conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum load mean 6.000, SD 1.3000), as well as when comparing the passive self-ligating brackets with the conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.708, SD 0.8628; load at maximum load mean 5.254, SD 2.645). The active self-ligating brackets tended to produce more friction when compared to the passive self-ligating brackets but were similar to conventional brackets with stainless steel ligatures. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1923 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Evaluation of Antimicrobial Efficacy of UVC Radiation, Gaseous Ozone, and Liquid Chemicals Used for Disinfection of Silicone Dental Impression Materials

by Joanna Wezgowiec, Anna Wieczynska, Mieszko Wieckiewicz, Anna Czarny, Andrzej Malysa, Piotr Seweryn, Marek Zietek and Anna Paradowska-Stolarz

Materials 2022, 15(7), 2553; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ma15072553 - 31 Mar 2022

Cited by 13 | Viewed by 2123

Abstract

Effective disinfection of dental impressions is an indispensable requirement for the safety of dental personnel and patients. The ideal method should be not only effective but also convenient, cheap, and environmentally friendly. This study aimed to reliably evaluate the efficacy of ultraviolet C (UVC) radiation, gaseous ozone, and commercial liquid chemicals used for silicone dental impressions disinfection. These methods were applied to two types of elastomeric impression materials: condensation silicones and addition silicones of various consistency (putty, medium, and light). The antimicrobial effectiveness against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Candida albicans was evaluated in vitro by counting colony-forming units (CFU) on the surface of samples. The one-way ANOVA with a Tukey HSD test or the Kruskal–Wallis with a Dunn’s test was performed. The results obtained revealed the efficacy of the proposed methods for disinfection of both C-silicones and A-silicones in most of the studied groups. Only one material (Panasil initial contact Light) was not effectively disinfected after UVC irradiation or ozone application. In conclusion, the potential of each disinfection method should be evaluated separately for each material. Moreover, in further research, the possible influence of the proposed methods on the physical properties of the impression materials should be thoroughly investigated. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Modern Materials Used in Dentistry - Review of XXI Century Knowledge

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Published Papers (4 papers)

Research

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI