Department of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2022 Sep;110(9):2121-2132. doi: 10.1002/jbm.b.35066. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
The study aims to compare the way modern resin-based composites (RBCs) respond to mechanical stress related to the tooth structure they are designed to replace. Eight representative light-cured RBCs, including ormocers, giomers, RBCs with nano and agglomerated nanoparticles, prepolymerized, or compact fillers, were selected. Flexural strength, FS and modulus/E, were measured in a three-point bending test. A fractographic analysis determined the origin of fracture. The quasi-static (indentation hardness/H , indentation modulus/E ) and viscoelastic (storage modulus/E', loss modulus/E″, loss factor/tan δ) behavior was assessed by a depth-sensing indentation test equipped with a dynamic-mechanical analysis module. One and multiple-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Tukey honestly significant difference (HSD) post-hoc tests (α = 0.05), and Weibull statistics were applied. Parameter material exhibited the highest effect on E (p < .001, η = .857), followed by FS (η = .729), and the strain (η = .553). Highest material reliability was identified in the RBCs with nano and agglomerated nanoparticles. The most frequent type of failure originated from volume (81.3%), followed by edge (10.6%), and corner (8.1%) flaws. Enamel evidenced three times higher H , E , and E' values as RBCs and dentin, and the smallest deviation from ideal elasticity. Ormocers exhibited the highest damping capacity, followed by the RBCs with prepolymerized fillers. Damping capacity and static mechanical properties are mutually exclusive. Analyzed RBCs and the tooth structure are better adapted to the relevant frequency for chewing than for higher frequencies. RBCs are comparable to dentin in terms of their mechanical performance, but apart from the damping behavior, they are far inferior to enamel. Damping ability of analyzed material could be exploited for correlation with the clinical behavior.
本研究旨在比较现代树脂基复合材料(RBCs)对其设计替代的牙体结构相关机械应力的反应方式。选择了八种具有代表性的光固化 RBCs,包括有机硅烷、玻璃离子、具有纳米和团聚纳米颗粒的 RBCs、预聚物或致密填料。在三点弯曲试验中测量了弯曲强度、FS 和模量/E。断裂形态分析确定了断裂的起源。采用配备动态力学分析模块的深度感应压痕试验评估了准静态(压痕硬度/H、压痕模量/E)和粘弹性(储能模量/E'、损耗模量/E"、损耗因子/tan δ)行为。应用单因素和多因素方差分析(ANOVA)、Tukey Honestly 显著差异(HSD)事后检验(α=0.05)和威布尔统计。参数材料对 E 的影响最大(p<.001,η=0.857),其次是 FS(η=0.729)和应变(η=0.553)。具有纳米和团聚纳米颗粒的 RBCs 材料可靠性最高。最常见的失效类型源于体积(81.3%),其次是边缘(10.6%)和角部(8.1%)缺陷。釉质的 H、E 和 E'值比 RBCs 和牙本质高三倍,且与理想弹性的偏差最小。有机硅烷表现出最高的阻尼能力,其次是具有预聚物填充剂的 RBCs。阻尼能力和静态机械性能是相互排斥的。分析的 RBCs 和牙体结构更适合咀嚼相关的频率,而不是更高的频率。RBCs 在机械性能方面与牙本质相当,但除了阻尼行为外,它们远不如釉质。分析材料的阻尼能力可用于与临床行为相关联。