journal article·2025-08-06Open access

Comparative In Vitro Analysis of Composite Resins Used in Clear Aligner Attachments

Francesca Gazzani, Denise Bellisario, Chiara Pavoni, Loredana Santo, Paola Cozza, Roberta Lione

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 15

Abstract

Background: Attachments are essential components in clear aligner therapy, enhancing retention and improving the predictability of tooth movements. Mechanical and wear properties of the composite resins used for attachment reproduction are critical to maintaining their integrity and shape over time. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the mechanical properties, thermal behavior, and wear performance of the hybrid composite Aligner Connect (AC) and the flowable resin (Connect Flow, CF). Methods: Twenty samples (ten AC and ten CF) were reproduced. All specimens underwent differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), combustion analysis, flat instrumented indentation, compression stress relaxation tests, and tribological analysis. A 3D wear profile reconstruction was performed to assess wear surfaces. Results: DSC and combustion analyses revealed distinct thermal transitions, with CF showing significantly lower Tg values (103.8 °C/81.4 °C) than AC (110.8 °C/89.6 °C) and lower residual mass after combustion (23% vs. 61%), reflecting reduced filler content and greater polymer mobility. AC exhibited superior mechanical properties, with higher maximum load (585.9 ± 22.36 N) and elastic modulus (231.5 ± 9.1 MPa) than CF (290.2 ± 5.52 N; 156 ± 10.5 MPa). Stress relaxation decrease was less pronounced in AC (18 ± 4%) than in CF (20 ± 4%). AC also showed a significantly higher friction coefficient (0.62 ± 0.060) than CF (0.55 ± 0.095), along with greater wear volume (0.012 ± 0.0055 mm3 vs. 0.0070 ± 0.0083 mm3) and maximum depth (36.88 ± 3.642 µm vs. 17.91 ± 3.387 µm). Surface roughness before wear was higher for AC (Ra, 0.577 ± 0.035 µm; Rt, 4.369 ± 0.521 µm) than for CF (Ra, 0.337 ± 0.070 µm; Rt, 2.862 ± 0.549 µm). After wear tests, roughness values converged (Ra, 0.247 ± 0.036 µm for AC; Ra, 0.236 ± 0.019 µm for CF) indicating smoothened and similar surfaces for both composites. Conclusions: The hybrid nanocomposite demonstrated greater properties in terms of stiffness, load-bearing capacity, and structural integrity when compared with flowable resin. Its use may ensure more durable attachment integrity and improved aligner–tooth interface performance over time.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Dental materials and restorations · Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty · Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, UniCamillus International Medical University, 00131 Rome, Italy

Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, 00133 Rome, Italy

References (21)

Show source-provided references
1. Gazzani, F., Bellisario, D., Quadrini, F., Danesi, C., Alberti, A., Cozza, P., and Pavoni, C. (2022). Light-curing process for clear aligners’ attachment reproduction: Comparison between two nanocomposites cured by the auxiliary of a new tool. BMC Oral Health, 22.10.1186/s12903-022-02407-8 ↗
2. Gazzani, F., Bellisario, D., Quadrini, F., Parrinello, F., Pavoni, C., Cozza, P., and Lione, R. (2022). Comparison between different composite resins used for clear aligner attachments: An in-vitro. Front. Mater., 8.10.3389/fmats.2021.789143 ↗
3. Design of the Invisalign System Performance10.1053/j.sodo.2016.10.001 ↗
4. D’Antò, V., Muraglie, S., Castellano, B., Candida, E., Sfondrini, M.F., Scribante, A., and Grippaudo, C. (2019). Influence of Dental Composite Viscosity in Attachment. Reproduction: An Experimental In Vitro Study. Materials, 12.10.3390/ma12234001 ↗
5. Scanning electron microscopy analysis of aligner fitting on anchorage attachments10.1007/s00056-018-00167-1 ↗
6. Influence of attachment bonding protocol on precision of the attachment in aligner treatments10.1007/s00056-019-00204-7 ↗
7. Influence of attachments and interproximal reduction on the accuracy of canine rotation with invisalign. A prospective clinical study10.2319/0003-3219(2008)078[0682:IOAAIR]2.0.CO;2 ↗
8. Effects of variable attachment shapes and aligner material on aligner retention10.2319/091014-637.1 ↗
9. Flowable resin composites: A systematic review and clinical considerations
10. Surface wear of resin composites used for Invisalign® attachments
11. Translucency, Stain Resistance, and Hardness of composites used for Invisalign Attachments
12. A review of dental composites: Challenges, chemistry aspects, filler influences, and future insights10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108852 ↗
13. Resin Composite-State of the Art10.1016/j.dental.2010.10.020 ↗
14. Bruno, G., Gracco, A., Barone, M., Mutinelli, S., and De Stefani, A. (2021). Invisalign® vs. SparkTM template: Which is the most effective in the attachment bonding procedure? A randomized controlled trial. Appl. Sci., 11.10.3390/app11156716 ↗
15. Simon, M., Keilig, L., Schwarze, J., Jung, B.A., and Bourauel, C. (2014). Treatment outcome and efficacy of an aligner technique—Regarding incisor torque, premolar derotation and molar distalization. BMC Oral Health, 14.10.1186/1472-6831-14-68 ↗
16. Relative wear of flowable and highly filled composite10.1016/j.prosdent.2004.11.006 ↗
17. Wear resistance of orthodontic attachments: A comparative analysis of different composite resins in clear aligner therapy10.1007/s00784-025-06316-2 ↗
18. Bansal, G., Gautam, R.K., Misra, J.P., Kishore, C., Mishra, A., and Verma, A. (2024). Evaluation of mechanical and thermal properties of thermosetting polymer composites. Dynamic Mechanical and Creep-Recovery Behavior of Polymer-Based Composites, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-443-19009-4.00005-9 ↗
19. Surface wear of attachments in patients during clear aligner therapy: A prospective clinical study10.1186/s40510-023-00506-y ↗
20. Roatkanjanaporn, N., Chavanavesh, J., and Teekavanich, C. (2025). Wear volumes of flowable and sculptable resin composite attachments and their correlation with retentive force of clear aligners: A laboratory study. BMC Oral Health, 25.10.1186/s12903-025-05852-3 ↗
21. Clinical evaluation of flowable resin composite versus conventional resin composite in carious and noncarious lesions: Systematic review and meta-analysis10.4103/JCD.JCD_226_17 ↗