Suppr超能文献

可流动大块充填树脂与可流动树脂基复合材料的比较:一项体外分析。

Comparison of flowable bulk-fill and flowable resin-based composites: an in vitro analysis.

作者信息

Engelhardt Frank, Hahnel Sebastian, Preis Verena, Rosentritt Martin

机构信息

Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Regensburg University Medical Center, 93042, Regensburg, Germany.

出版信息

Clin Oral Investig. 2016 Nov;20(8):2123-2130. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1700-4. Epub 2016 Jan 9.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Flowable bulk-fill resin bonded composites (RBCs) are supposed to show improved abrasion resistance and fracture toughness in comparison to flowable conventional RBCs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Specimens of eight flowable RBCs (5× flowable conventional, 3× flowable bulk-fill) were fabricated for testing relative fracture toughness (SENB), relative three-body wear, the Vickers hardness, glass transition Tg (differential scanning calorimetry; DSC) and filler mass fraction (thermal gravimetric analysis; TGA). A laboratory veneering composite was used as a reference. Fracture toughness and wear values were related to this reference. Scanning electron microscope images were evaluated for fraktographical and microstructural investigations. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way Anova, the Bonferroni post hoc test and the Pearson correlation test (α =0.05).

RESULTS

Relative fracture toughness varied between 0.64 and 1.34 (1.00 = 1.69 MPam½) and relative wear rates between 1.24 and 0.55 (1.00 = 134 μm). The Vickers hardness ranged between 14.4 and 57.2 HV. TGA showed filler fractions between 55 and 77 wt.%. Tg values varied between -67.8 and -40.9 °C. None of the tests identified clear differences between flowable bulk-fills or conventional flowable RBCs. The Pearson correlation coefficient (cc) showed significant correlations (cc > 0.583; p < 0.001) between relative fracture toughness and hardness or filler content. There was a significant correlation (cc = 0.757; p = 0.005) between relative wear and glass transition temperature or between filler fraction and the Vickers hardness (cc > 0.702; p < 0.001). For all filler sizes breakdown was found, where clusters and pre-polymerized particles were partly disintegrated.

CONCLUSIONS

Flowable bulk-fill RBCs showed no improved abrasion resistance and fracture toughness in comparison to flowable conventional RBCs.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Differences in the properties were higher between the individual materials than between the material groups. Therefore the appropriate material selection may be essential for a clinical success.

摘要

目的

与可流动的传统树脂粘结复合材料(RBCs)相比,可流动的大块充填树脂粘结复合材料预计具有更好的耐磨性和断裂韧性。

材料与方法

制备了8种可流动RBCs的样本(5种可流动传统型,3种可流动大块充填型),用于测试相对断裂韧性(单边切口梁法;SENB)、相对三体磨损、维氏硬度、玻璃化转变温度Tg(差示扫描量热法;DSC)和填料质量分数(热重分析;TGA)。使用一种实验室贴面复合材料作为对照。将断裂韧性和磨损值与该对照相关联。对扫描电子显微镜图像进行评估,以进行断口分析和微观结构研究。使用单因素方差分析、Bonferroni事后检验和Pearson相关检验(α = 0.05)进行统计分析。

结果

相对断裂韧性在0.64至1.34之间变化(1.00 = 1.69 MPam½),相对磨损率在1.24至0.55之间变化(1.00 = 134μm)。维氏硬度在14.4至57.2 HV之间。TGA显示填料分数在55至77 wt.%之间。Tg值在-67.8至-40.9°C之间变化。没有一项测试能明确区分可流动大块充填材料和传统可流动RBCs之间的差异。Pearson相关系数(cc)显示相对断裂韧性与硬度或填料含量之间存在显著相关性(cc > 0.583;p < 0.001)。相对磨损与玻璃化转变温度之间或填料分数与维氏硬度之间存在显著相关性(cc = 0.757;p = 0.005)(cc > 0.702;p < 0.001)。对于所有填料尺寸,均发现有破坏,其中团簇和预聚合颗粒部分解体。

结论

与可流动的传统RBCs相比,可流动的大块充填RBCs并未表现出更好的耐磨性和断裂韧性。

临床相关性

各材料之间的性能差异高于材料组之间的差异。因此,选择合适的材料对于临床成功可能至关重要。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验