Suppr超能文献

低粘度大块充填复合树脂与传统树脂复合树脂在牙洞中物理、机械及粘结行为的广泛评估

Extensive Assessment of the Physical, Mechanical, and Adhesion Behavior of a Low-viscosity Bulk Fill Composite and a Traditional Resin Composite in Tooth Cavities.

作者信息

Sousa-Lima R X, Silva Lja, Chaves Lvf, Geraldeli S, Alonso Rcb, Borges Bcd

出版信息

Oper Dent. 2017 Sep/Oct;42(5):E159-E166. doi: 10.2341/16-299-L.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the degree of conversion (DC), depth of polymerization (DP), shrinkage stress (SS), flexural strength (FS), elastic modulus (EM), and bond strength (BS) of a low-viscosity bulk fill resin composite and a paste-like traditional composite.

METHODS

Tetric Evo-Flow Bulk Fill (TBF) and Empress Direct (ED; Ivoclar Vivadent) composites were used. DC (%) and FS/EM (MPa/GPa) were evaluated in bar specimens (7×2×1 mm; n=10) using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and a three-point bending test in a universal testing machine (UTM), respectively. For DP and BS tests, conical cavities (n=10) were prepared in bovine dentin and restored with the composites. DP was analyzed by calculating the bottom-to-top surface microhardness ratio (BTHR), and BS (MPa) was determined by push-out testing in the UTM. SS (MPa) was measured for one increment of TBF and two increments of ED in a UTM attached to an extensometer (n=5). Data were analyzed using Student t-test and analysis of variance (α=0.05).

RESULTS

TBF presented higher values than ED for DC (85.7±6.6% vs 54.2±4.9%) and BS (0.95±0.70 MPa vs 0.35±0.15 MPa). TBF values were lower than ED values for FS (76.6±16.8 MPa vs 144.9±24.1 MPa) and maximum SS (0.77±0.07 MPa vs 1.07±0.15 MPa). TBF and ED values were similar for BTHR (0.83±0.16 vs 0.84±0.08) and EM (11.5±2.8 GPa vs 12.5±2.6 GPa).

CONCLUSIONS

The physical and mechanical properties of TBF, a bulk fill resin composite, were similar or superior to those of ED, a conventional composite, with the exception of FS measurements.

摘要

目的

比较低粘度大体积充填树脂复合材料与膏状传统复合材料的转化率(DC)、聚合深度(DP)、收缩应力(SS)、弯曲强度(FS)、弹性模量(EM)和粘结强度(BS)。

方法

使用Tetric Evo-Flow大体积充填树脂(TBF)和Empress Direct(ED;义获嘉伟瓦登特公司)复合材料。分别使用傅里叶变换红外光谱仪和万能试验机(UTM)中的三点弯曲试验,在条形试件(7×2×1毫米;n = 10)中评估DC(%)和FS/EM(兆帕/吉帕)。对于DP和BS测试,在牛牙本质中制备锥形洞(n = 10),并用复合材料进行修复。通过计算从底部到顶部表面的显微硬度比(BTHR)分析DP,通过在UTM中进行推出试验测定BS(兆帕)。在连接有引伸计的UTM中,对TBF的一个增量和ED的两个增量测量SS(兆帕)(n = 5)。使用学生t检验和方差分析(α = 0.05)分析数据。

结果

TBF的DC(85.7±6.6% 对54.2±4.9%)和BS(0.95±0.70兆帕对0.35±0.15兆帕)值高于ED。TBF的FS(76.6±16.8兆帕对144.9±24.1兆帕)和最大SS(0.77±0.07兆帕对1.07±0.15兆帕)值低于ED。TBF和ED的BTHR(0.83±0.16对0.84±0.08)和EM(11.5±2.8吉帕对12.5±2.6吉帕)值相似。

结论

除FS测量外,大体积充填树脂复合材料TBF的物理和力学性能与传统复合材料ED相似或更优。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验