See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/272085792

Everstick® and Ribbond® fiber reinforced composites: Scanning Electron

Microscope (SEM) comparative analysis

Article in European Journal of Inflammation · August 2011

CITATIONS READS

35 3,658

4 authors, including:

Alessandra Lucchese Francesco Carinci

Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele University of Ferrara
122 PUBLICATIONS 1,999 CITATIONS 669 PUBLICATIONS 14,302 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

study of implantology View project

The use of Hyaluronic Acid in implant and sinus lift procedures View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Francesco Carinci on 10 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INFLAMMATION Vol. 9, no. 3 (S), 73-79 (2011)

EVERSTICK® AND RIBBOND® FIBER REINFORCED COMPOSITES: SCANNING ELECTRON

MICROSCOPE (SEM) COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

A. LUCCHESE1, F. CARINCI 1, G. BRUNELLI2, R. MONGUZZI1,

1
Department of D.M.C.C.C., Section of Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy
2
Department of Dentistry and Maxillofacial Surgery, Don Orione Institute, Bergamo, Italy

The aim of the study is to compare morphological features and to evaluate wetting capabilities of two fiber-
reinforced composites (FRCS); group A: Stick Tech®, by Stick Tech Ltd, Turku, Finland, and group B: Ribbond®,
by Ribbond Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA, used in orthodontic retention, by scanning electron microscope
(SEM). 6 groups were identified in relation to the fiber used, A: Everstick®, B: Ribbond®, and to the different times
of exposition to a fluid wetting resin (Heliobond®, by Schaan, Liechtenstein): A1-B1=0 seconds, A2-B2=5 seconds,
A3-B3=5 minutes. Wetting was followed by 40 seconds of light curing with a conventional halogen curing light
Optilux 501® d with a light intensity of 930 mW|cm2 and a wavelength range of 400-505 nm Samples were SEM
analyzed both in cross section and lengthwise. SEM observation revealed a lengthwise direction of cylindrically
shaped fibers immersed in a metacrylate matrix in group A1 and straight but woven fibers in group B1. In both
control groups voids ranging between 0 μm and 20 μm were visible between the fibers and groups of fibers. Groups
A2 and B2 showed uniform coverage with Heliobond® and microcracks were visible. In cross section views it is
apparent that wetting with Heliobond for just 5 seconds was not sufficient for the adhesive to impregnate the fibers
deeply. Groups A3 and B3 revealed a deeper penetration of Heliobond®; voids ranging between 5 μm and 15 μm
could be observed only in the deepest portion of the fiber. The fiber’s preparation plays a decisive role: a longer
fiber wetting time with fluid resin before curing, enhances the morphological features of FRC, making them more
suitable for passive and active orthodontic systems, periodontology or prosthetic dentistry.

The development of fiber-reinforced composites Many applications for fiber-reinforced composites

(FRCS) technology has opened a new era in aesthetic are currently being studied and tested in many different
dentistry. The matrix of the fiber-reinforced composites medical fields; some are already in an advanced stage
(FRCs) is a light-cured thermoset BisGMA, which allows of research with in vitro, in vivo and clinical testing
superior bonding, since it is identical to the adhesives that underway, while others are still in the initial stages. In
are commonly used in dentistry (1). The fibers are correctly some instances, reinforced composites are studied in
oriented, and excellent coupling is achieved, followed by order to enhance specific properties of the material’s
an initial stage of polymerization of the matrix. The initial performance. In other fields the possible use is being
polymerization makes the matrix flexible and adaptable, evaluated on the basis that some biological tissues are
so it can be contoured the teeth and easily formed before natural composites (bone tissue, tendons, ligaments,
final polymerization (2). After forming, a final cure, enamel, dentine)(18).
stabilizes the shape and produce optimal mechanical The use of FRCs has been described for passive
properties (3). The scientific studies and clinical trials orthodontic applications and active tooth movement,
published have encouragingly underscored their possible mainly on typodonts (2); as anchorage reinforcement
applications in the fields of prosthodontics, restorative in adults treated with lingual appliances and as a
dentistry, endodontics, periodontology, orthodontics and bonded canine-to-canine retainers (12-14) (16-22). The
pediatric dentistry (3-17). mechanical properties of twisted steel wire, commonly

Key words: Fiber reinforced composites, Wetting capabilities, Scanning electron (SEM) microscope analysis

Corresponding author: Alessandra Lucchese DDS, MS Orth.

Department of D.M.C.C.C. Section of Maxillofacial and
Plastic Surgery University of Ferrara Corso Giovecca, 203,
0393-974X (2011)
School of Dental Hygiene 44100 Ferrara (Italy) Copyright © by BIOLIFE, s.a.s.
Phone: +39.0532.455874 This publication and/or article is for individual use only and may not be further
Fax: +39.0532.455876 reproduced without written permission from the copyright holder.
E-mail: [email protected] 73 (S) Unauthorized reproduction may result in financial and other penalties
74 (S) A. LUCCHESE ET AL.

used for fixed post-orthodontic retention and periodontal exposure to the fluid resin before curing, 0 or 5 seconds or 5
splinting, and of the orthodontic stainless steel wires, minutes:
commonly used in orthodontic fixed appliances, have Group A1-n=6: type A fiber - without impregnation with a
been compared to those of fiber-reinforced composites fluid resin (Heliobond®) before curing (control group).
Group A2-n=6: type A fiber - impregnation with a fluid resin
using flexural strength testing. These studies show that
(Heliobond®) for 5 seconds before curing.
FRCs are less flexible than the wires commonly used Group A3-n=6: type A fiber - impregnation with a fluid resin
for orthodontic retention and that they may occasionally (Heliobond®) for 5 minutes before curing.
fracture (14-16). Fiber behaviour plays a very important Group B1-n=6: type B fiber - without impregnation with a
role in determining the ability of a composite to resist fluid resin (Heliobond®) before curing (control group).
to external loads by stopping, slowing or enhancing the Group B2-n=6: type B fiber - impregnation with a fluid resin
propagation of a possible crack (15-17). (Heliobond®) for 5 seconds before curing.
Several types of fibers are employed to provide Group B3-n=6: type B fiber - impregnation with fluid a resin
resistance and rigidity in the composite: glass fibers, (Heliobond®) for 5 minutes before curing.
Following exposure to the fluid resin, all fibers were
polyethylene, carbon graphite, boron and aramidic-kevlar
light cured by hand using a conventional halogen curing unit
(19-21, 23). The factors which influence mechanical Optilux 501® d with a light intensity of 930 mW|cm2 and a
properties of fiber-reinforced composites are fiber wavelength range of 400-505 nm for 40 seconds, as suggested
orientation, fiber quantity, impregnation of fibers with by the manufacturer. The light intensity was measured by the
the polymer matrix, adhesion of fibers to the polymer international radiometer device of the curing unit and monitored
matrix and harmony between characteristics of fibers and throughout the study. After polymerization, the specimens were
polymer matrix (7). stored under dry conditions.
A careful analysis of morphological characteristics and
the evaluation of the impregnation capability (wettability) SEM sample preparation
In order to evaluate the morphological characteristics and the
achieved through SEM study of FRCs can provide
fiber impregnation capabilities of Heliobond®, the samples were
useful information and could help us to understand the cut in cross and lengthwise sections using a surgical scalpel.
resistance of the material and to foresee its reaction to Each specimen was gently washed with deionized water and
mechanical stress during its clinical usage in different blown dry. Each sample was then mounted on metallic support,
areas of dentistry. The present study focuses on two of the gold-coated (thickness: 30 nanometers; time 2 minutes; current
fibers most commonly used in the field of orthodontics, 25 mA) for observation under a scanning electron microscope:
comparing their morphological features and evaluating JEOL Model 5400e. In order to avoid possible subjective
their wettability through an SEM analysis, after a different judgments, the operator observing the SEM images of the fibers
time of exposure with fluid resin. was not aware of the group to which they belonged.

MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS

In this study two fiber-reinforced composites have been Group A1 - SEM analysis of sectioned samples made
analyzed: with fibers of group A1: type A fiber, without impregnation
- Type A: Everstick® a, made of glass fibers with a diameter with fluid resin before curing (control group), showed the
of 0.76 mm, Young’s modulus of elasticity of 28 GPa, in its presence of cylindrical shaped fibers oriented lengthwise
“prepreg” form, so that the fibers were pre-impregnated with
and immersed in a polymethilmetacrylate (PMMA)
poly-methylmetacrylate (PMMA) red polymer and silane from
the manufacturer.
matrix. Between the fibers and the polymer and within the
- Type B: Ribbond® b, patented leno weave; Ultra High polymer, large gaps (10-20 μm) were visible (Fig. 1).
Molecular Weight and high Young’s modulus of elasticity Group A2 - SEM analysis of sectioned samples made
polyethylene fibers cold treated with plasma gas to enhance with fibers of group A2: type A fiber, impregnated with
resin adhesion (Table I). fluid resin for 5 seconds before curing, showed medium
A fluid resin Heliobond® c was used to wet fibers before sized porosities (5-20 μm) and crazes (microcracks)
curing, with a total immersion. both in the superficial and central portions of the fiber.
Even though the fiber of group A2 showed superior
Sample Preparations
characteristics compared to the control group A1,
Before impregnation and polymerization, the specimens
were cut to a length of 20 mm with scissors. For each type of
Heliobond® did not completely penetrate between the
fibers n=18 samples (Type A) and n=18 samples (Type B) were fibers and the polymer, thus the persistence of some
prepared, for a total of 36 samples. The FRC samples were porosity (Fig. 2).
divided into 6 group, each consisting of 6 specimens, according Group A3 - SEM analysis sectioned samples made
to the type of fiber tested, type A or type B; and to the time of with fibers of group A3: type A fiber, impregnated with
 European Journal of Inflammation
75 (S)

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

fluid resin for 5 minutes before curing, showed a non- with fluid resin before curing (control group), showed the
homogeneous penetration of Heliobond®, only in the presence of interwoven straight directed cylindrical fibers.
central portion, where a gap (5-20 μm) between the fibers Large voids (0-10 μm) between the fibers and group of
was clearly visible. The image at higher magnification fibers could be clearly observed. Especially in cross
of the resin-impregnated sample showed the presence of section a compaction of the fibers could be observed, with
empty spaces between the fibers, which were not filled by a “spreading effect”, due to the surgical scalpel’s cutting
the resin. Crazes (microcracks) between the fibers were pressure (Fig. 4).
less marked than in group A2 and the superficial areas Group B2 - SEM analysis of the samples impregnated
appeared uniformly impregnated (Fig. 3). with fluid resin for 5 seconds before curing (group B2:
Group B1 - SEM analysis sectioned samples made type B fiber), showed a consistent and uniform coverage
with fibers of group B1: type B fiber, without impregnation by Heliobond®; the presence of non fissured crazes
76 (S) A. LUCCHESE ET AL.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 4.

(microcracks) was probably attributable to a second Group B3 - SEM analysis of sectioned samples
curing phase in tension areas formed during the curing of impregnated with fluid resin for 5 minutes before curing
the material. It could be observed that the more internally (group B3: type B fiber), showed a thick and uniform
located group of fibers, which was not affected by the cut surface layer of Heliobond®; gaps between the fibers and
and therefore free from the compaction effect, showed a groups of fibers were markedly reduced. Small crazes
poor compenetration by Heliobond® (Fig. 5). (microcracks) could be observed on the surface, probably
 European Journal of Inflammation
77 (S)

Fig. 5.

Fig. 6.

due to excessive shrinkage during curing (Fig. 6). of prosthodontics, restorative dentistry, endodontics,
periodontology, orthodontics and pediatric dentistry.
DISCUSSION In clinical practice, the FRCs technique of bonding is
easy and fast (no laboratory work is needed), and all
The properties of the materials and fiber preparation procedures may be completed in a single appointment.
play a decisive role in the use of FRCs in the fields Moreover, there is no need to remove a significant amount
78 (S) A. LUCCHESE ET AL.

of tooth structure, making the technique reversible and impregnation of the fibers with fluid resin, determines
conservative. In addition fibers reinforcement makes it imperfections at a level that could compromise clinical
possible to satisfy the aesthetic needs of patients in an applications.
inexpensive minimally invasive fashion and hence it Even with a limited impregnation time, 5 seconds,
represents an effective alternative to current more costly, could considerably reduce imperfections (voids, curing
time consuming and invasive techniques (3-17). crazes, microcracks) of the fibers, presumably making
The presence of spaces between the fibers and groups them more resistant to external agents.
of fibers suggests ways to enhance product quality, as Considering the advantages of a longer fiber
these gaps can become bacterial growth sites, sources of impregnation time, with fluid resin and before curing,
humidity or assist crack propagation, leading to fracture it is recommended that such procedure would be most
after they are placed in the oral cavity and subjected to indicated for clinical application.
occlusal stress. When using fiber-reinforced composites as a product
The objective of this study was to compare the in a fixed retention system, it is recommended that the
morphological characteristics and to evaluate the capacity fibers are subjected to a preliminary treatment in order
of impregnation through a SEM analysis of two types to enhance their morphology and maximize their clinical
of fiber-reinforced composites (FRC’s): Everstick ® and efficiency.
Ribbond ®.
Exposure to the fluid resin (Heliobond®) in the two ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
types of fibers was performed according to information
supplied by the manufacturer. However, the penetration of This work was supported by FAR from the University
the fluid resin in each fiber was compared after different of Ferrara (FC), Ferrara, Italy and by Don Orione Service
application times before curing. s.r.l., Bergamo, Italy.
SEM analysis of the samples not impregnated with
fluid resin showed a longitudinal direction of Everstick® REFERENCES
fibers (group A1) and a linear but interwoven direction for
Ribbond® (group B1). 1. Freilich MA, Meiers JC, Duncan JP, Eckrote KA, Goldberg
Voids measuring between 0 and 20 µm could be AJ. Clinical evaluation of fiber-reinforced fixed bridges. J
observed between fibers and groups of fibers in both Am Dent Assoc 2002; 133:1524-34; quiz 40-1.
groups (A1 and B1). 2. Burstone CJ, Kuhlberg AJ. Fiber-reinforced composites in
Images of the surface of samples of fibers of orthodontics. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 2000; 24:
Everstick® (group A2) and Ribbond® (group B2), treated
271-79.
with fluid resin (Heliobond®) for 5 seconds before curing,
3. Freudenthaler JW, Tischler GK, Burstone CJ. Bond
showed a uniform and homogeneous coverage by the
fluid resin. However there was a difference between strength of fiber-reinforced composite bars for orthodontic
these two Groups: Ribbond® fibers showed a number of attachment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 120:
non-fissured crazes (microcracks) which were uniformly 648-53.
distributed over the surface and probably due to resin 4. Narva KK, Vallittu PK, Helenius H, Yli-Urpo A. Clinical
shrinkage during curing. In the Everstick® sample, crazes survey of acrylic resin removable denture repairs with
(microcracks) could be observed both on the surface and glass-fiber reinforcement. Int J Prosthodont 2001; 14:219-
in the central portion, especially in the area of the cut. In 24.
cross section it could be clearly observed that exposure to 5. Vallittu PK, Sevelius C. Resin-bonded, glass fiber-
Heliobond® for just 5 seconds was not sufficient for a deep reinforced composite fixed partial dentures: A clinical
impregnation of the adhesive. study The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 2000; 84:413-
On the other hand, cross section images of Everstick®
18.
(group A3) and Ribbond® fibers (group B3) impregnated
6. Vallittu PK. Case report: a glass fibre reinforced composite
for 5 minutes showed a great penetration, although still
non-homogeneous, of Heliobond® with the presence of 5 resin bonded fixed partial denture. Eur J Prosthodont
to 10 µm voids in the central portions of the fibers. Restor Dent 2001; 9:35-8.
The present SEM observations indicated that the 7. Ellakwa AE, Shortall AC, Marquis PM. Influence of fiber
two types of fiber-reinforced composites show structural type and wetting agent on the flexural properties of an
characteristics differing in number, diameter, length and indirect fiber reinforced composite. J Prosthet Dent 2002;
orientation and showed that the usage of fiber-reinforced 88:485-90.
composites, without a preliminary treatment through 8. Yavirach P, Chaijareenont P, Boonyawan D, Pattamapun
 European Journal of Inflammation
79 (S)

K, Tunma S, Takahashi H, Arksornnukit M. Effects of Francisco California.; 2005.

plasma treatment on the shear bond strength between fiber- 15. van Heumen CC, Kreulen CM, Bronkhorst EM, Lesaffre
reinforced composite posts and resin composite for core E, Creugers NH. Fiber-reinforced dental composites in
build-up. Dent Mater J 2009; 28:686-92. beam testing. Dent Mater 2008; 24:1435-43.
9. Schiavetti R, Garcia-Godoy F, Toledano M, Mazzitelli C, 16. Lucchese A, Manuelli M, Gangale S, Trombelli L. Fiber
Barlattani A, Ferrari M, Osorio R. Comparison of fracture Reinforced composites (G-FRCs) versus orthodontic
resistance of bonded glass fiber posts at different lengths. twisted stainless steel wire: three point bending test at 5
Am J Dent; 23:227-30. mm. Ortodonzia clinica 2008; 4:55-59.
10. Danza M, Fanali S, Viscioni A, Franco M, Avvantaggiato 17. Kulkarni G, Lau D, Hafezi S. Development and testing of
A, Lucchese A, Zollino I, Carinci F. Implants inserted fiber-reinforced composite space maintainers. J Dent Child
in maxillary sinus grafted with fresh frozen homologue (Chic) 2009; 76:204-8.
iliac bone :a retrospective study. European Journal of 18. Mukherjee DP, Saha S. The application of new composite
Inflammation 2011; 9:35-39. materials for total joint arthroplasty. J Long Term Eff Med
11. Imai T, Watari F, Yamagata S, Kobayashi M, Nagayama Implants 1993; 3:131-41.
K, Toyoizumi Y, Nakamura S. Mechanical properties 19. Smith MS. Recent developments and prospects in dental
and aesthetics of FRP orthodontic wire fabricated by hot polymers. The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 1962:1066-
drawing. Biomaterials 1998; 19:2195-200. 78.
12. Karaman AI, Kir N, Belli S. Four applications of reinforced 20. Schreiber CK. Polymethylmethacrylate reinforced with
polyethylene fiber material in orthodontic practice. Am J carbon fibres. British Dental Journal 1971; 130:29-30.
Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 121:650-4. 21. Vallittu PK. A review of fiber-reinforced denture base
13. Danza M, Fanali S, Rigo L, Franco M, Avantaggiato resins. The European journal of prosthodontics 1996; 5:
A, Lucchese A, Zollino I, Carinci F. Cryopreserved 270-76.
homologue iliac crest grafts used in sinus lifting for 22. Lucchese A, Porcu F, Dolci F. Effects of various stripping
implant rehabilitation: a case series analysis. European techniques on surface enamel. J Clin Orthod 2001; 35:691-
Journal of Inflammation 2011; 9:29-34. 5.
14. Lucchese A, Sfondrini MF, Cacciafesta V, Gangale S. 23. Stein PS, Sullivan J, Haubenreich JE, Osborne PB.
Mechanical properties of FRCs and orthodontic twisted Composite resin in medicine and dentistry. J Long Term
wires: a three point bending test. Am Ass of Orthod. San Eff Med Implants 2005; 15:641-54.

View publication stats