In recent years, various implant and filler materials have been used depending on the necessity of application in different parts of the human body. The biomaterial used in the living body must have adequate mechanical, esthetic, and chemical behavior throughout the treatment process. For this reason, researchers are developing many test methods to predict the behavior of biomaterials placed in the human body over time. This study aims to analyze the chewing simulation test methods and the mechanical behavior of composite materials used as filler biomaterials in the treatment process in recent years. Also, in vitro and 3D finite element analysis methods of composite materials with different filler structures were evaluated for the chewing simulation test process. Biomaterials implanted in the human body can be subjected to continuous and complex damage mechanisms. For this reason, the ability to model the behavior of the chewing simulation test method parameters performed in the laboratory environment on living tissue is important. In addition, the inadequate mechanical behavior of the composite biomaterial may lead to unsatisfactory treatment processes. Overall, understanding the fatigue and wear behavior of composite materials during chewing plays an important role in predicting in vivo results. This result is seen as an important key in improving the mechanical and esthetic behavior of composite materials over time.
TurssiCPPurquerioBDMSerraMC.Wear of dental resin composites: Insights into underlying processes and assessment methods - a review. J Biomed Mater Res B2003; 65B: 280–285.
2.
YilmazEÇSadelerR. A literature review on chewing simulation and wear mechanisms of dental biomaterials. J Bio Tribo Corrosion2021; 7: 91.
3.
LiuBGanXZhaoY, et al. TEGDMA releasing in resin composites with different filler contents and its correlation with mitochondrial mediated cytotoxicity in human gingival fibroblasts. J Biomed Mater Res2019; 107: 1132–1142.
4.
YılmazECSadelerR.Investigation of three-body wear of dental materials under different chewing cycles. Sci Eng Compos Mater2018; 25: 781–787.
5.
WuYChangCChangK, et al. Effect of micro-/nano-hybrid hydroxyapatite rod reinforcement in composite resins on strength through thermal cycling. Polym Compos2019; 40: 3703–3710.
6.
PatnaikK SRBhatA, IK, Factors influencing mechanical and wear performance of dental composite: a review [Einflussfaktoren auf mechanische Eigenschaften und verschlei ss verhalten bei einem zahnmedizinischen Verbundwerkstoff: Ein uberblick]. Materialwiss Werkst2020; 51: 96–108.
7.
Çelikİ. Influence of CrN coating on electrochemical behavior of plasma nitrided pure titanium in bio-simulated environment. J Bionic Eng2016; 13: 150–155.
8.
YilmazE.Effect of contact load upon attrition-corrosion wear behavior of bio-composite materials: in vitro: off-axis sliding contact-chewing simulation. Biomed Res J2020; 7: 17–22.
9.
MairLHStolarskiTAVowlesRW, et al. Wear: mechanisms, manifestations and measurement. Report of a workshop. J Dent1996; 24: 141–148.
10.
KruzicJJArsecularatneJATanakaCB, et al. Recent advances in understanding the fatigue and wear behavior of dental composites and ceramics. J Mech Behav Biomed2018; 88: 504–533.
11.
FugolinAPPPfeiferCS. New resins for dental composites. J Dent Res2017; 96: 1085–1091.
12.
FerracaneJLPalinWM.Effects of particulate filler systems on the properties and performance of dental polymer composites. Woodh Publ Ser Biom2013; 53: 294–335.
13.
GaroushiSGargoumAVallittuPK, et al. Short fiber-reinforced composite restorations: a review of the current literature. J Investig Clin Dent2018; 9: e12330.
14.
YilmazESadelerR.Effect of different thermal change tests of micro tensile strength behavior bio-composite materials: in vitro study. Biomed Res J2021; 8: 14–19.
15.
AlfaroMFRossmanPKViera MarquesIDS, et al. Interface damage in titanium dental implant due to tribocorrosion: the role of mastication frequencies. J Bio Tribo Corrosion2019; 5: 81.
16.
VillanuevaJTrinoLThomasJ, et al. Corrosion, Tribology, and Tribocorrosion Research in biomedical implants: progressive trend in the published literature. J Bio Tribo Corrosion2017; 3(1): 1–8.
17.
YilmazEÇ. Investigation of two-body wear behavior of zirconia-reinforced lithium silicate glass-ceramic for biomedical applications; in vitro chewing simulation. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2021; 24: 806–815.
18.
YilmazEÇ. Investigation of Bruxism wear behavior of titanium alloy biomaterials; experimental and 3D finite element simulation. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2025; 28: 1771–1782.
19.
YilmazEC.Investigation of two-body wear resistance of composite materials for biomaterial application in oral environment: the influence of antagonist material. Mater Technol2020; 35: 159–167.
20.
YilmazEÇSadelerR. Investigation of two- and three-body wear resistance on flowable bulk-fill and resin-based composites. Mech Compos Mater2018; 54: 395–402.
21.
YilmazEÇ. Influence of lubricating conditions on the two-body wear behavior and hardness of titanium alloys for biomedical applications. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2020; 23: 1377–1386.
22.
YilmazEÇ. Effects of thermal change and third-body media particle on wear behaviour of dental restorative composite materials. Mater Technol2019; 34: 645–651.
23.
LimaVPMoraesRROpdamNJM, et al. The ability of two chewing simulation devices in emulating the clinical deterioration of anterior composite restorations in severely worn teeth. J Adhes Dent2022; 24: 19–28.
24.
AntunesPVRamalhoA.Influence of pH values and aging time on the tribological behaviour of posterior restorative materials. Wear2009; 267: 718–725.
25.
SouzaJCMBentesACReisK, et al. Abrasive and sliding wear of resin composites for dental restorations. Tribol Int2016; 102: 154–160.
26.
YilmazESadelerRDuymuşZ, et al. Effect of ambient pH and different chewing cycle of contact wear on dental composite material. Dent Med Res2018; 6: 46–50.
27.
HeintzeSD.How to qualify and validate wear simulation devices and methods. Dent Mater2006; 22: 712–734.
28.
YilmazEÇ. Effect of axial bruxism bite force on titanium alloys biomaterials experimental chewing test and 3D finite element simulation. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng2024; 1–10. DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2024.2443146.
29.
NotaAPittariLPaggiM, et al. Correlation between Bruxism and gastroesophageal reflux disorder and their effects on tooth wear. a systematic review. J Clin Med2022; 11: 1107.
30.
ToledanoMCabelloIAguileraFS, et al. Effect of in vitro chewing and bruxism events on remineralization, at the resin-dentin interface. J Biomech2015; 48: 14–21.
31.
LavigneGJKhourySAbeS, et al. Bruxism physiology and pathology: an overview for clinicians. J Oral Rehabil2008; 35: 476–494.
32.
NishigawaKBandoENakanoM.Quantitative study of bite force during sleep associated bruxism. J Oral Rehabil2001; 28: 485–491.
33.
AbbinkJHvan der BiltABosmanF, et al. Speed-dependent control of cyclic open-close movements of the human jaw with an external force counteracting closing. J Dent Res1999; 78: 878–886.
34.
YilmazECPolatM.Design and manufacture of computer-controlled wear device for biomedical material: a different ambient pH experimental application. Biomed Biotechnol Res J2023; 7: 558–562.
35.
AlecrimLFerreiraJSalvadorMD, et al. Wear behavior of conventional and spark plasma sintered Al2O3-NbC nanocomposites. Int J Appl Ceram Technol2018; 15: 418–425.
36.
YilmazEÇ. Effect of sliding movement mechanism on contact wear behavior of composite materials in simulation of oral environment. J Bio Tribo Corrosion2019; 5: 63.
HeintzeSDZellwegerGCavalleriA, et al. Influence of the antagonist material on the wear of different composites using two different wear simulation methods. Dent Mater2006; 22: 166–175.
39.
HahnelSBehrMHandelG, et al. Two-body wear of artificial acrylic and composite resin teeth in relation to antagonist material. J Prosthet Dent2009; 101: 269–278.
40.
GhazalMKernM.The influence of antagonistic surface roughness on the wear of human enamel and nanofilled composite resin artificial teeth. J Prosthet Dent2009; 101: 342–349.
41.
WassellRWMcCabeJFWallsAWG. Wear characteristics in a two-body wear test. Dent Mater1994; 10: 269–274.
42.
KrejciILutzFReimerM, et al. Wear of ceramic inlays, their enamel antagonists, and Luting cements. J Prosthet Dent1993; 69: 425–430.
43.
LazaridouDBelliRPetscheltA, et al. Are resin composites suitable replacements for amalgam? A study of two-body wear. Clin Oral Investig2015; 19: 1485–1492.
44.
YilmazE.Investigating the effect of chewing force and an abrasive medium on the wear resistance of composite materials by chewing simulation. Mech Compos Mater2020; 56: 261–268.
45.
YilmazEÇ. Investigation of three-body wear behavior and hardness of experimental titanium alloys for dental applications in oral environment. Materwiss Werksttech2020; 51: 47–53.
46.
KoottathapeNTakahashiHIwasakiN, et al. Quantitative wear and wear damage analysis of composite resins in vitro. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2014; 29: 508–516.
47.
KoottathapeNTakahashiHIwasakiN, et al. Two- and three-body wear of composite resins. Dent Mater2012; 28: 1261–1270.
48.
HahnelSSchultzSTremplerC, et al. Two-body wear of dental restorative materials. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2011; 4: 237–244.
49.
WimmerTHuffmannAMEichbergerM, et al. Two-body wear rate of PEEK, CAD/CAM resin composite and PMMA: effect of specimen geometries, antagonist materials and test set-up configuration. Dent Mater2016; 32: E127–E36.
50.
MehlCScheibnerSLudwigK, et al. Wear of composite resin veneering materials and enamel in a chewing simulator. Dent Mater2007; 23: 1382–1389.
51.
YilmazEÇ. Effect of artificial saliva on the mechanical and tribological behavior of nano-/micro-filled biocomposite materials for biomedical applications. J Dent Res Rev2020; 7: 37–41.
